EVANGELIST'S APPEAL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20930, 21 July 1931, Page 12

EVANGELIST'S APPEAL.

WIFE'S SEPARATION ORDER. UNHAPPY WEDDED LIFE. STORY OF KIDNAPPED CHILD. A separation order was granted in the Magistrate's Court last February to Henrietta May Thomas against her husband, William John Tremnyne Thomas, described as an evangelist. Tho wife also was given tho guardianship of her child. The husband's appeal against that order was taken by way of a rehearing before Mr. Justice Smith in the Supreme Court yesterday.

Mr. Sullivan appeared for appellant and Sir.. S. C. Clarke for Mrs. Thomas. Somewhat sensational happenings in the home which have already been the subject of Court proceedings were again, recounted.

Mr. Clarke stated that the parties were married in November, 1927. During the whole of their married life the appellant, who was "some kind of a gospel missioner," brought in only £l6, namely, £2 from a mission at Grey Lynn, of which his wife bore the expense, and £l4 from ii mission at Ashburton. The Case for the Respondent.

Continuing, counsel said that appellarit was a man of violent temper, and that on June 29, 1930, he committed a particularly brutal assault upon his wife. Her brother came in and rescued her. Thomas instituted proceedings against him and lost tho case.

In December, 1930, appellant kidnapped the child by a ruse, saying ho was taking it into a shop to buy a Christmas present. The man was a "sponger" and would never work, said counsel.

The respondent stated in evidence that she and her husband had lived at Birkenhead. There was one child of the marriage, born in 1928, and it was now with her. Her husband had two acres of land at Birkenhead and they thought they could make a living with fruit and poultry and his evangelistic work. At the time of the marriage she had some means of her own, including £IOO invested, £125 in the bank, £IOO insurance money and £SO worth of furniture.

Witness said she kept the house going for tho first six months with her own money and hel husband brought in nothing. She paid all her own confinement expenses out of her insurance money. When that money ran out they received 14s a week charitable aid.

Allegations Against the Husband. Respondent alleged threatening conduct on the part of her husband in what she described as his "insano turns, After his mission at Ashburton he expected to secure an appointment there, and was quite unsettled at Birkenhead, trying to sell the property. Charitable aid was • stopped, and her brother helped to keep them. In January, 1930, witness said, she forgot U-' buy tobacco for her husband and he "went insane" for a time, raving, shouting and s%vearing at her. Shortly afterwards he came home drunk at night and wanted her to leave the house.- He assaulted her more than once, grabbing her by the throat, and when a Miss Mitchell, who lived next door, tried to interfere, he threw her on the floor.

Miss Mitchell then summoned her brother, and he took Thomas to the police. He came home drunk the, next night. Witness said she gave evidence in the case against her brother in May, 1930, and went to live with her brother after that, as she was frightened, of Thomas. Her husband gave her no maintenance. Mother's Recovery of Child. When her husband ran away with the child on December 15, 1930, it nearly "drove her silly." The child was only two years and five months old and for four months she did not see him. Uiomas told her she would never see him again. On February 23, 1931, she obtained a habeas corpus for the return of the child, but Thomas left the property and she was unable to serve the writ on him. This appeal was to have come before the Court last. April, continued respondent, but was adjourned because her husband had to go to hospital. It was through the hospital authorities she obtained her husband's address. She found the child there in a very low state of health, and she had not properly builfc him up yet. " He was a beautiful child when I lost him," said witness. At this stage the hearing was adjourned.