SOME SENSATIONAL SWEARING.

NZ Truth, Issue 97, 27 April 1907, Page 5

SOME SENSATIONAL SWEARING.

IS FREDERICK HARE A FEARFUL LIAR?

Is He a Thief and a Bigamist ?

A Man who Subjected His Spouse to Refined Torture.

The Matrimonial Miseries of an 111-assorted Pair.

There was some fearful perjury committed m Magistrate McArthur's Temple of Justice last Monday afternoon m the case of Hare v. Hare, and according to threats made that same afternoon, trtiose proceedings will not end there. It was a case of matrimonial misery m which a mid-dle-aged woman named Annie Hare asked for maintenance and summalry separation from her husband, her second one, who is a big burly bloke, who is going bald, and whose name is Frederick Hare, and who, according to Mr. Wilford's instructions, had been married three pr four times, m fact, it was hard to say how many, times lye ha>d ibeen spliced. Mr Wilford further reckoned it was a peculiar case, as the woman had been advised by her spouse to bring whatever proceedings she preferred., and counsel himself had that same day rescued the, wife from the hiibby, who -stood .".snarling, sneering and, jeering at her, and to 'avoid any ness he (Mr. Wilford) had escorted her into the solicitor's room. Frederick absolutely declined., to support his wife, who ran a small fruit shop m Riddifot-rl Street, Newtown^ and he tantalised her by walking past the shop with another woman. He often went to the fruit markets with ■this other person, and prompted her to bid aga-mst his i' wife, when the fruit was being' auctioned. He DEALT OUT REFINED TORTURE, said Mr. Wilford, and he declined to leave the shop when requested, and tbld Mrs Hare to go to hell when she as&ed him to leave. If tie' went into the box counsel threatened to cross-examine ' . him regarding some previous convictions which would take somo of -the gilt ofi his ginserbread. . The complainant then got going, and said that she and her husband had lived four years m this country, having come, from Tasmania, where Fred had been employed m a grain store, and was a sewiug-machin'g agent, and now she kept a fruit shop, for -which ahe -was prepared to takia a "tenner." "This gentleman, who is your husband, is not unknown to the Courts," | observed Mr. Wilford, and to which the woman responded^ "No," Are you his first wife ?— rNo. Has he been convicted of any offences ? This was too much for Mr Dunn, who was appearing for Hare, and he promptly objected ; so Mr. Wilford { threw out a challeiTce to Hare to deny that he had been convicted of bi'gamv, and did three years for it, and alsp served a term for larceny. * 'Will he deny that he left a wife and seven children, and married a gdrl, for which he got three years, and that he %oi\ six months for stealing from a grain store?" was Mr, Wilford's challenge. The bigamy term , i the woman , explained, was served before she : > mar-. ried-him. Sbcl went, on- t0 ..'., observe that since keepinc; the fruit shop he was Jn. the habit of extracting cash Irom the shop till,, and staying, away for a day or two. After he hr.d paraded HIS OTHER PETTICOATED FANCY | past the shop she had ordered him to leave the shop, and he sweetly told her to go to hell, and showed that he was master by observing that be would go out when he liked. He had nqt provided her with any money i ir.ee November, and he had brought another woman to the fruit markets and bid against her (the wife) for fruit. Mr. Dunn cross-examined the woman concerning her (residence at Palmerston North, where by mutual consent they had separated ; but after they had been a month apart they had resumed cohabitation. Hare was described by her as a district man-: ager for some insurance company, and his commission averaged about;' £5 per 'week. He had allowed he: ?3 10s per week for house-keepius: expenses,- out of "which £1 a week was paid for cent. . After the lash burst-up she had ffone to Hastings and 'Wellington, and he had followed her; She sold the househoLd furniture, and realised £4-9,, and £.15 of it went for. the purchase of the fruit business, out of which just a bare living was made as there was too much Chinese competition.. The receipt was m he,r name, and not n that of her husband. By a former husband she had two children, both of whom earned their own living, end there was .one child, a boy t by her marriage with Hare. V : Mr. Dunn: Is it (not a fact that your husband had teen carrying or the business ? No i; he took the money out of the till. One of her pbjections to Hare s f aying m the shop was that he sat smoking and reading all day, and customers complained of it. Mr. Wilford : He' fumigated the place. Mr. Dunn ; You told your husband to clear out ?— Yes. When I saw him with another woman : be told jne he would cut my t'iroat. Who is this woman ?-r-A Mrs. W?!---don, and she keeps a fruit sho:> ii Cuba Street. He is always m lvcr company. In his endeavour to show +*>at Hare had done all m his ro^er to keep the fruit shop poiror. Mr. Dunn evinced some anxiety conorrnin'" i gold watch, which he said \ r>resentation from some insurance company .a "Presentation," trasp^d the wife, "he trot it at Invercurpill frcm ,a jeweller, THEN TURNED INSOLVENT, and never paid for it." You, took the watch and pawned it ?— Yes : a!! he could get was £2. so he said that a woman could do a better deal than a man, so I got £5 on it. He said he would buy some fruit with it, but hs did not. Subsequently she raided another £3 on the watch, ami Mr. Dunn sup- ] rested that she had kept, the tic Vet-, The woman explained .that he had

left the ticket m an overcoat pocket, winch he had forgotten to take away, when removing his other clothes. She had raised the £3 unknown to him. From Mr. Dunn's questions it was sought to 'show that he was a very liberal kind of cuss, who was eternally making valuable presents. She denied' that he had bought a bicycle for her step-daughter ; but, it seemed, according to the woman, that Hare had insured some individual at Palmerston North, and had taken a bicycle for the instalment. She denied also that he had bought her a £25 bicycle ; this she declared she bought out of her • house-keeping money. A seal-skin coat for £5 5s had come from the same source of revenue, though four years ago he had bought her a gold watch. Now, what about these convictions'; do you know of your own knowledge that he was convicted ?— Yes. She explained that she had married him after he had come OUT OF GAOL FOR BIGAMY. •The marriage was at Albany, W.A. The conviction for larceny from the grain store for which he served six months was after her marriage with him. She had, she said m a mournful manner, £200 when she .married him ; but it disappeared three months afterwards. - "If he swears on path that he has never been convicted, will you. contradict him ?" said Mr. Dunn blandly, "I will," said the wife with alarming emphasis, .and she then proceeded to explain that it was over some crook cheque business m Melbourne that these things were found out against him. < ■ Hare- then took his. turn m tbe witness-box, . and cooly and calmly denied that he had suffered imprisonment for bigamy and theft. "The statements were untrue," '-'I never at any time served a term of imprisonment," were his denials; slowly but emphatically made. He \had, he said,, been married nine or ten years. He married the complainant, at Albany, W.A. He stated that he earned ovex £300 per year as an insurance- agent, and that he had allowed hie wife £3 10s for house-keeping expenses, and that he had paid the rent. He had paid tor the fruitshop himself, and he said the receipt was m his name . '•*' My wife can't run j the business," he went on, "she cannot add two and two together, and that's the whole trouble." He said the takings in ' the shop were £1 i per day, and the people who were there before him had made a fortune out of it. Mr. Wilford : And they sold it to you for £35. Hare complained that Ms missus wouldn't cook fdr him, and that she had ordered him off the premises, and LIKE AN OBEDIENT SPOUSE, he had gone, but turned up e.TOrysfrv cbnd day : to ; see how things were . progressing, and take his boy but for a walk, or take, him a present. When he left she was far from destitute; as she had about £15 to her credit m the bank. Having further thrown bouquets at himself on being a lpvjina: and gentle spouse, Mr. Wilford toolc him into hand, and warned him to be careful of the answers he gave to certain questions. "Have you ever been m gaol," was the general question asked. "No, I have not;; I have answered that before," replied Hare, who leaned over the front •of the witness-stand and smiiled affably on his tormentor. Since you havp been married to the complainant have you been found guilty of larceny at Launeeston, Tas> masia ?— No. And taken from Launceston and donfrned m Hobaxt gaol ?— No. He denied having been convicted of larceny, m Sydney, under the name of Warburton, or any other name. Wheti asked if he had ever gone by the name of Eric Hare he hesitated somewhat) but derailed it m. the long run, and he denied, of course, a conviction for bigamy. Have you ever been convicted under the name of Hare or Warburton anywhere" ?~No. He emphatically denied that his wifo visited Mm m Hobart gaol, and that she had called on Premier Lewis, who intervened and had his sentence reduced by three months. Tiiesc thi-n^ never happened, persisted Hare, .because he " ...... , HAD NEVER BEEN IN GAOL. He denied' that he had been kicked out of his job as an insurance agent for borrowing' money from policy holders. He lost his billet because his wife came fooling about his office. It was not a fact that he trying to kill his wife's business. This denial of /♦'refined torture';' led to a series of questions concerning Hare's connection with Mrs Wai don. He said ha only bought fruit for her on commission, and thon he said his commission for the past few weeks amounted to £7 or £8, which he had not collected, and which he woulid geji ( if he had luck. Another alleged:: incident m his career was resurrected when it was mentioned that the A.M.P. Society had threatened extradition proceedings against him m connection with embezzlement, or something of that kind. He denied most suavely that a detective had then shown him his gaol photo and his criminal record, which he then admitted was his. "If it?* was true," he suggested, "then I have a double." The story told by his wife he characterised as a pack of lies. "Now, you be careful," said Mr Wilford, menacingly, "we are going to see this thing through. If what you say ■ are lies then you will HAVE TO PAY THE PENALTY. "Yes," chipped m Magistrate McArthur, "we had a man like that the other day, and he was bowled out." Dr. McArthur said lie was quite satisfied that the man had not main- : tainotl his wife, and granted the wife a maintenance order of ' 25§ nee .week/

custody of the child and separation. Mr Dunn said Hare desired to appeal, and Mr Wilford said it, was only bluff on Hare's part and insisted on him being ordered to find a suirety for the payment of the order, otherwise they would find that he would slope. A week was given Hare m which to put up the jmoney for the appeal. A CURIOUS COINCIDENCE. After the case was over, and m order to ascertain, if possible, who the liar was, some enquiries were made, and from the N.S.W. Police Gazette, of 1898, p. 256, it was discovered that on at the Ta.mworth Quarter Sessions one Frederick Wartwrton Hare, on a charge of bigamy, was sentenced to three years'imprisonment. This Hare was described as an agent, or bookkeeper; born 1862. Height 6ft lin. Fair hair, hazel eyes, straight nose,' and "Previously Convicted.". In 'the Tasmanian Police Gazette, p. 19, it, was further ascertained that during the week ending 7-l-'G3i Eric Hare, or Hehir, \v»as, at Launceston, convicted of larceny and Sentenced to six months' imprisonment. His description m the Tasmanian Police Gazette faithfully tallied with that given of Frederick Warburton j Hare m the N.S.W. Gazette, so that ! little doubt exists that the pair are identical. And after 'all ther,e is very little doubt that the joker who so cheerfully swore m the S.M.s Court last Monday that he had never been m gaol, has a shocking bad memory.