THE WOES OF THE WHITES

NZ Truth, Issue 169, 12 September 1908, Page 4

THE WOES OF THE WHITES

A HAIR-DRESSER'S MATRIMONIAL HASH.

She Was a Blanky Nuisance.

The Judge Reserves His Decision.

(From Sydney "Truth.")

"You appear to be a very bitter woman 1" said Mr Justice Simpson to a petitioner for divorce before his Hcnor on Monday last. The woman 'was highly surprised by the question. "No." she replied, after hesitating a moment ; "I am not." His Honor ■ remarked that that was . - iV ' CERTAINLY THE IMPRESSION he had formed of her. T'he petitioner was a woman between" 25 and 30 years of age, named Maud White. She is of nervous temperament, and someAYhat delicate physiqjue. She was married m March, 1901, to Joseph George White. White was a widower, with three children. The grounds on which Mrs White applied for a divorce wee those of cruelty and desertion. The parties lived for some time at Canterbury (N.S.W.), where White had a business as a hairdresser and tobacconist. White did not oppose the petition. In the first place, White came to Sydney from New Zealand; The marriage took place here. White subsequently . returned to New Zealand. The evidence -of Mrs White ' was that he was at present m business at Palmerston North (N.Z.) as a hairdresser aiid .tobacconist. Mr Boyce, who ■ appeared for Mrs White, examined her at length AS TO THE CRUELTY, complained oH ' ' Mrs White stated that th\s practically began at the time she gave, birth to a child. This was the . only child born of the marriage. : Gambling and swearing were indulged ' m by men m White's shop. Mrs Whjte and tjhe; children coujd not help hearing tlie swearing from the residential portion . o ( f the premises. Whenever she complained to White 1 , ■ he addressed her m: most filthy terms. One night m bed he struck hex m the face with his clenched fist. He followed up this by putting het > out of bed. "I ■will not," he said, "have ,£ny blanky -woman m bed with me who is no Wanky gppa to me." , This was because she had refused, to allow Him tip , cohabit with her. She was not, m a fit..' condition physically to cpmply Avith his wishes. On another occasion, she Had to ' , SLEEP WITH THE* BABY " m a cot because of ill-treatment of her under somewhat similar circumstances. | -• ' :"■ (1 Mr Boyce : What sort 'of a cot was it? —An ordinary baiDy's cot. . > . I suppose you fixed it up with some boxes or chairs ?— Yes. ; Mrs White explained ! that on July- 12, 1903, she was removed by ambulance to the Prince Alfred Hospital. ' Mr Boyce: Did White say anything to you when you were being taken away? —He said I was never to come back there- again. v -; ' His Honor : What became of the children ?— My mother took' the baby. The other children stayed on there. He looked after them. • . : • Mr Boyce : How long were you m the hospital? — Six weeks. ' • Did White see you there ?— No. Mrs White declared that from the -PRINCE 'ALFRED HOSPITAL .1 she went tp the Camden Convalescent Hospital. was there four weeks. Finally she went to ! stay with her parents. She; 'had never l^ lived with ' White again. She had earned her own living ever since.. She endeavored, tp get h^r clothes ; \fronv White. : "You are, said White, who was seen, by her at the shop, and who had refused to let her have the. clothes, "a blan^y nuisance to me/ 'His 1 Hpnor : Did he ask you to come back?— When I ' went , there for my clptnes he asked me. when I was coming back; I told him that I was going to take him at his' word, arid that I did not intend returning /to him at all. It was. then he said thai; I was a blanky nuisance, i I was. afraid to go back. •You were afraid of him V— Yes. ■ / Then why did you go to the house where he was ?— To. get my clothes. My clothes were all there. I had NOTHING BEYOND what I was wearing. Mr Boyce : You liad- subsequently to take proceedings to get him to deliver up the clothes ?— Yes. : - You got them ?^ Yes ; cut' m pieces. (Laughter.) . His Honor : Cut m pieces V— Cut up with a pair .of scissprs. All of , them ?— Yes. (More laughter.) . Mr Boyce : What was the name cf the woman that lived opposite ye.i at Canterbury ?-^Vlrs Masofc. Did Whiffe ever pass any remark to ycu about Mrs 'Mason ?— The Witness's reply was to the effect that Whito said that everything Mrs Mason owned had'- be3n earned by her m a vile manner. V • Where was Mrs Mason at the time White thus ; sppke of 1 her ?— She was standing in 'her doorway. Did you notice what ghe was wearing V —Yes ; she was wearing one of my wrappers., (Laughter^ ' Mr .Boyce, explained that why White had not been further CHARGED WITH. ADULTERY was because he (Mr Boyce) did not want to raise a possible difficulty as to White's domicile. ■'.'.- Mrs White informed his Honor that during the time they had been living apart 'White had written her something like fifteen letters. She had not replied to one of thesp. Her reason for this was that the letters were always forwarded to her through a ; third party, or that the address to which she might have replied was otherwise kept from 'her. •. Mrs Herman, of York-street, Canterbury, corroborated ' Mrs White 1 , as to •WHiteV cruelty m.* the cot incident m July, 1903. Witness told' White that Mrs White was very ill. He. took no notice of her. i Witness itold White for the second time of Mrs White's" illness. She also wanted ■him to get. a' doctor. But White' ■did ■not-. 1 " . -, .'• ■ ' ' : '\- . - i : ' : - '■' : • ; ; (JET A DOCtORi ' nor did he appear to take any notice of anything said by witness ■to him' respecting' Mrs White's condition. The following morning witness sent her little girl lor Dr. Kellar. When Ivellar arrived White would npt let him m. White raised his hand. We barred Kellar's entrance. The result was that Kellar was unable to sec Mrs White. . Mr Boyce: Kellar did not got in"— No. he went away again. Mrs Herman stated that she, had asked White to assist her m removingiMrs White froni the cot m which she was lying to the bed. So far from assisting witness to do this White caught hold of Mrs White roughly and bumped her head against one of the bed-posts. Mr White had frequently shown witness marks or bruises which she declared had been _ INFLICTED BY WHITE. Mr Boyce*: While Mrs White was away ill did you ever see White over at Mrs Mason's ? — Yes. often. Charles Stewart, a foreman plasterer, o? St. Peter's, gave evidence as to* White's domicile m New South Wales.

His Honor recalled Mrs White for the purpose of examiuinK her concerning the letters written to her by White. The letters had been Kept by Mrs White. His Honor looked through the lot of them. "'They throw a lot of light on tho question," he remarked.

H ; s Honor pointed out (1) that m letter after letter White urged a reconciliation between them ; (2) that he had pleaded to Mrs Whjte m vain for a word as to the child; (3)" that he declared that Mrs White had been influenced by her father and mother against, him ; and W that she knew that it was not he who had deserted her, but she who had

DESERTED HIM. Mrs White denied that she had been m

any way iniluenced by her people m anything she had done. His Honor dwelt (1) on White's repeated solicitations of Mrs White to overlook the pastf and (2) on. her fixed determiI nation m not answering even onG of his letters — either to forgive him, or to satisfy the inquiries made by him concerning the child. It was m these circumstances that His Honor went on to remark that he believed Mrs White to be a very hard or bitter woman. His Honor (reading from one of White's letters to Mrs White!) : He* was arrested and imprisoned ?— Yes ; at Darlinghurst. Was it through you he was put m Darlinghurst ?— lt was ' AT HIS OWN WISH. (Laughter.) Mrs White explained that she first proceaded against White for the detention of her clothes. He returned them m pieces. She then sued him for the cost of the clothes. It was m this way that he had come to be imprisoned. His Honor (still reading oDe of the letters) : In this he implores you not ' to keep him m Darlinghurst V — Yes. Did you try to secure his release ?— Wo. His Honor : lam not at all satisfied with the case. There is no actual desertion, nor do I think there has been con-, structive desertion. In • * i "CONSTRUCTIVE" DESERTION there are three things, namely— (l) Reasonable grounds for leaving, (2) behavior to the woman m such a way as to signify the man's intention' that she should taaye her home, and $3) "a continuation for three years of suehT a state •of things as to show that if. the woman did go back there would have been a repetition of his conduct. : At the outset- White did behave badly tri Mrs White. But he wrote her all these letters before the three years were up. • Mr Boyce : At the time he wrote them he was- living m adultery. His Honor : No ; the only thing admitted is that he was living m adultery at the time of the service of the petition. You could hardly expect anything else. His wife ■ ■ HAD' LEFT HIM, au-J would not go back to him. It is highly improbable that she would, have succeeded , even on the ground of adultery. White did not Jbake up with this other woman until long after Mrs White left him, , It did not transpire from the proceediugs whether "this other woman was Mrs Mason or some other woman altogether. . ; . Reference was made to one of the letters sent to Mrs White from Palmerston North having come through; or having been addressed by, a" Mr Parker. This was instanced by Mr Boyce m- support of the contention that Mrs White did not really know White's precise address.. His Honor's attention was also drawn to the fact that at first the letters to Mrs White were subscribed :— "FROM YOUR HUSBAND." THpp, after, the divorce proceedings had been instituted it was : "From your dear husband." In this way fit was sought to show, that the v letters had 'simply been written to deceive the court. His Honor (who was not satisfied, on this point, or that Mrs White could not have written to White if she had- wished to do so) : White may be passing under the name of '■'Parker,", at P.almerston North. : \ ■'•-;,': ; ' •

Finally his Honor reserved his judgment,