EAREE DIVORCE CASE

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1737, 14 June 1905, Page 2

EAREE DIVORCE CASE

THE ■•.'QUESTION OF A LEMONY

F.URTHER. .DEVELOPMENTS

.The Alastorton divorce case in which the Itey. Percy Charles Wyndham Earee, Anglicfi-n vicar, obtained a decree nisi against' his wife, Florence Georgina Hash wood Faroe, on November 10 th, 1903, was again before the Supreme Court' on 7th June in the shape of two .motions before the Chief Justice in Chambers-.—il.) To reduce the allowance of £2 a week alimony, and (2) to discharge the. order for alimony entirely.. .

Mr M. Myers appeared in support of the motions,' and Mr C. B. Morison represented Mrs Eare-e.

The motion tb reduce the alimony was based on the ground that the petitioner’s means were, .‘insufficient., and that to discharge fhe order, on the ground that“.. she had. committed a breach of the condition entitling her to . the weekly payments. Both ’ motions had been standing over for many months: ' •A > large number of affidavits was filed in the case/.1-It was alleged that Mrs Earee' had been guilty of. impropriety on or about March Ist, 1904, wlien staying at the house of the* .Rev Joseph Bewsoai,. as “ Mrs Jevvois,” and some letters were put in in support . In an answering affidavit, . Mrs Earee denied the charge of impropriety, and. stated that the letters relied upon to prove it, in her own handwriting, were written and left about to create a sensation,- as at the time she felt almost demented, and thought that .they would bo taken to her .husband and annoy him but she had no other intention in writing them. . Her affidavit, made in '.London, on November 15th, 1904, alleged that she had no other means of living but- the. alimony : allowed her by the Court. .. ‘ ••

Affidavits filed by the petitioner showed that lie went to England on a .trip on November 30th, 1903, and remained there- - until September Btli, 1904, arriving, hack; in New Zealand about the last day of October. He was absent from New Zealand when the letters referred to in his wife’s affidavit,Were written'/ His departure Horn ; New Zealand was well known in the Wairarapa, and was referred to hu newspapers circulating in - Greytown, where the respondent had gone to reside. His children went to England in June, 1904, and as far as he was aware the respondent had not seen them since April, 1903. His trip Home had teen taken on the advice of Hrs Hosking and Ross. The cost of his trip to England and return was about £IOO, and his personal expenses while there were about £2- per week. The cost of. sending his children and . the lady who took charge of them to England was £IOO. The expense of their hoard, and lodging had, up to the present, been £1 per week, and he' had had to pay a lady- £3O a year to look . after them. During his absence from New Zealand he had had.to pay a substitute to carry out his parochial duties a salary of. £l7O a year. In January last his father, who Was rector of Alphamstone, in Essex, -died, aiid left no property. He had now, ni addition to the maintenance of himself and his children, to support two •sisters of: his, one of whom was a chronic .cripple, and required the attendance of the other. He' anticipated having to support one of them permanently in future. In January, 1905, he sent £SO. to his sisters, to relievo their immediate necessities, and since then he had been. sending £2O per month to- England for the maintenance of his sisters, his children, and the salary and maintenance of their attendant. - His salary had been at the rate of £250 a year, and lately he had been receiving £1 Is a week from a boarder. He had no other means, with the exception of voluntary . subscriptions from his parishioners, which - varied year by year', and had never exceeded £4O in any -one year. -At the end of May lie resigned his parochial position at Masterton. and accepted a curacy in England at £IOO a year. His reasons were that he would he able to live more -cheaply in England, and would have the. advantage of..being able to keep his children with him and educate them. He would also be able to look after the -members of his family. He was quite unable to make the payments for maintenance ordered by the Court. Mr Myers informed the Court that his learned friend had given notice that he required Mr Earee for crossexamination. The petitioner was present. - Mr Morison said lie objected to any reduction in the amount of the alimony. He had had no opportunity of producing an affidavit to refute the recent affidavit filed by Mr Earee. His Honor: The only ground of reduction is want of funds ? Mr Myers: Yes, your Honor. Percy Wyndham diaries Earee, vicar of M.isterton, was then cross-examined by Mr Morison. He said he had - accepted a curacy in .England at £169 a year. It was a. voluntary act on his part. He would not deny (hat he had not paid anything towards the alimonysince Eebrunry of last year: he did not know. Mr Myers: I’ll admit that.

V/inir-ss admit rod that on tus return from England recently lie was presented with a testimonial from his parish in iters. He received CSU odd anonymously beiove lie wont Home; lie thought- it. was be fore-'the case came on at'all. He only recoived £2O actually in cash on his return. There was a' big presentation, but that was all lie received above expenses. There was £l7o- - a.ii. Ho (hi! not know of any other monv>' h-e had received. Out of the ’£•l7o, £l5O was handed over to Mr Beard'to pay his locum tenons and expenses. His Easier offerings..were .included in the £l7O. He had no money in bank now, hut some £7O or £BO in cash and his furniture. He sold his piano before he went Home. Since Iris return from England he had done nothing in the way of providing for his late., wife’s' maintenance. He understood that he was not legally hound to do so.. -

- Mr Morison.: You felt no moral obligation? Mr Myers objected to his learned friend commenting in such a .Wav on *the evidence. 1

Witness, in the course/of further evidence, said he 'understood she had obtained an engagement through a clergyman.

Mr Morison : Is she not simply living with a clergyman’s-'family in Ireland?— I never heard of it until this morning. In Ireland!

•Mr Myers said an affidavit was'filed on May 19th of this year, to the effect that ’the respondent was now earning her living as a nurse in London. Mr. Morison pointed out that there was nothing to show she was being, romuaerated. ■

-. -'Witness (continuing) said lie had given up a .living worth £3OO a year' to accept this curacy. He Wished to he absolutely relieved from any. obligation whatever under . the judgment of the Court. At the time, of the divorce he would not consent to making liis. wife any allowance ' whatever. Mr Morison : You ai*e aware that Mrs Earee was sent Home through the in-, strumeixtality of some people who interested themselves in her? You had nothing to do with getting her passage Home.? —Nothing whatever. . . Her being sent Home was to give her the chance of a life after this di-vorce?-—I don’t know. Ho you cafe ? Mr Myers: Well, well.

Air Morison: It ■ was felt that after the divorce proceedings this unfortunate woman ought not to be allowed to go down-, and various people in New Zealand realised that New Zealand was. a bad place for her to stay under the circumstances, and that she ought to be. with 'her friends in England. - So she was sent Home, with the result- that she is now in what is a good place, hut T have no instructions that- she- is getting any salary. His Honor: The only question, now is as to the means, because the Court lias already determined that she' is entitled to maintenance, and I am not going to vary it. •Mr .Myers : Not on this application. His Honor remarked that the other motion’ raised the question whether-the conditions of- alimony had been, broken. The petitioner was then -examined by -Mr Mvers.

Counsel : Ho you know, whether or not this £l6O is . inclusive or exclusive of a. house? —-I don’t know.'

You have told Air Morison that you have not in aid the alimony for fifteen months. The position, I understand, is that about fifteen. months ago .you caused to be filed a notice of motion to discharge the alimony on account of unehastity on the ’respondent’s part—a breach of condition ?—I Was in England a,t the time. Air Beard did so on rav behalf. v

It has not been your fault, I understand, that, the motion has not been disposed of tarlier ?—I understood that it would he brought on while I was in England.

You were advised that, pending that motion, you should not continue your payments?-.—Yes.

Air AlorLson has asked about a collection made for .you : do you know whether any -sum was collected for ATrs Earee ?—-I don’t- know. 1 know she went Home first class. Air AlorLson : We should not be. likely to send her >steerage. .'Witness.: There is a. difference between steerage and first class.

Mi* Alyors: You ' sent your children Home, a-s stated in the affidavit?—Yes.

Since you came hack from Fmi land your-father at Home has died?—Yea And your family at Thome has been left in a more or. less destitute condition ? —Yes. the home is gone. Do yon consider. it yonr duty to go Horae, so that yon may join force* with •your people who are loft destitute, nod help to look after them P—That is the reason, of my resigni up;—that T may live' with my children and my sister, '.'he mili net as housekeeper for me. This concluded the evidence. Mr Myer-s said lie was prepared fo aryuo both motions. As Air !Vlorison had to. attend ihe meeting of the i-Tult. Licensing Committee. the furt her hearing was adjourned. I he Chief .hid ice intimating 1 hat he would hoar counsel on his return from Jdcnhoim. and before, the sitfimi of the Comd; of Anneal.