GRAHAM'S GAME

NZ Truth, Issue 605, 20 January 1917, Page 5

GRAHAM'S GAME

The "Word "-Spreader and his Wife and Bairns AN ITINERANT PREACHER BOLTS TO SYDNEY .i And is Brought Back to face the Music What Became of the fife's £5000 ?

"The growls of the Grahams"; was staged at the Auckland "Agony Cpurt,£ before Magistrate Kettle on Friday of) last week. ' » s Tho whole play worked around the question of whether Thomas William Graham could afford to pay thirty "bojb" a week to keep the wolf from the door of his wife Caroline .Louisa Graham and her "kiddies." Graham reckoned he could not, but Mrs. Graham and Lawyer Matthews held the opposite view, so Graham applied to Magistrate Kettle to HAVE THE -AMOUNT REDUCED. " To 'grip the- story properly, one has to go back to July of last year, when Mrs. Graham obtained the existing order of thirty "bob" a week against her husband, who, by the way, did not appear m court to defend tho action. Graham is well known m the religious world throughout New Zealand and is a vendor of the: '.' word."- But, unlike most preachers, he is-rather versatile, and, "spruiks" on no particular brand, of the "word," only drawing the line at the Anglican or Roman Catholic brands. He has preached m numerous places m the Dominion, sometimes to the Baptists, sometimes to the Presbyterians, and again to the Seventh Day •Adventists. Mrs. Graham, his wife. Is -a "twicer," Graham being her second try m the matrimonial handicap. She has children by both "hubbies," and she stated, when m cqurt on July 7 last, that she had about five thousand "quids" when she married Graham, and she alleged he had spent it for her once he got control of it. As stated above, she got a court order for 30s against Graham m July last,, but evidently It had not produced much wealth, and she had occasion recently to spend £25 and have him arrested In Sydney bocause he had failed dreadfully to keep up with the order; m fact, the order was first and Graham could not even be called a starter, as ho had" not paid anything either out of his salary or the collection plates to his wife. When brought up on warrant a couple of weeks ago, Graham HAD VERY LITTLE TO SAY. and Magistrate Frazer ordered him to pay the £25 expenses incurred m bringing him back, and also ordered him to report twice weekly to the police, and advised him to keep m touch with the order or do the best he could.

Tho next act wa« Graham's application to have the order not aside on tho grounds that ho waa not present at tho hearing: that ho had offered his wifo a homo; and that ho could not pay 30s a week. His application camo on for hoiu-lnjr on Friday, when Graham was not repro«ontod by counsel. Graham at once went Into tho witness box and began to tell hla tale. /Magistrate Ivottlo: Tho order was made against you for £1 10s on July 7 of last year?-— Yea. And you went to Sydney?— Yes. Did you know that the order was made against you?— Well, I did. Hid you make any arrangements to provide for your wifo before you. left? —1 had my HOllcllors hero to rupresoni me. Well, you wont to Sydney oifd did not send any money? — No. And eventually you were arrested on warrant? — Yea. You woro brought back to Auckland and brought before Mr. FraxerV—Yefl. And he ordered you to p«y the coki I Ineurrtid m brintrinx y<»u buck, to r«port to th<? police, eio?. — Yes, your Worship. The frroundK on which the maintenance order wim mndu ti?T»!n.'it me were that I had squanUnriHl iGOOO of my wife's money, «m) that I hud preached for «vory d«nomlnatlon Jn the country. It Is not so. IHh Worxhipt You ,, did not appear. Tho mmunonii wan tterveel on you lv .liii»<' and th«» ca*« csuno «>» for licarlnK tut .July 7. Vim did not appear, but CUT OKI-' h'On SYDNEY? —-■Y<»«, back to my work. Why didn't you appear?— -I didn't want to.

Your first objection is the ground that- you were not present at the hear-J ing, but you deliberately cut off to: Sydney the 'day before the case came: ;on without making any arrangements' to provide for yo,ur wife. . There is: nobbing: at all m your first objection.? Now, your second ground is that you 1 have offered your wife a. home?— -I would like. to reply to the charge. I-i have never handled my wife's money.? I hold indentures from both church/; and business. I have never preached for any denominations bur three. W His Worship- 1 don't care "tuppence"' what: you preached for. '.- The question? is: Had you or 'have ; you a homo for' your wife? You have been travelling 1 about New Zealand preaching- or doingsomething, of the sort. Where waa*' your home? , ;\ .Graham then went into a long rigmarole about how he had been a; Method tet homo missionary at Little* River, •: Gahtorbur.y, m 1911, how he left' Cor New South Wale's m 1912, and got= work for a No-license, organisation.He came back and got a job at Dar-- 5 gaville spreading the "word." In 1915" wont to Sydney to- preach the Presbyterian brand, stdpped there five monthsj came back to New Zealand m 1916 and. preached Presbyterian gospel at Wai-; pukarau. Sometimes he was travelling for a publishing firm, sometimes' for,, /tea manufacturers, and at others preaching. But he did not stay long anywhere, and was continually moving about. Ho married his wife m 1002, and they lived together for over two years, when he was home missionary at Palmerston North. He did not. know how much money she had when he married her, but she said£sooo. Mr. Kettle had continually to cut Graham short m his rambllngs, as thos ''pious one" was inclined to stray away from the rules of evidence. His Worship: Did you handle the money at all?— Not till my wife took mo out of tho missionary work and put £2200 m a .business, which was a failure, and after three years we- camp out with a mortgage of £400 on the, freehold. , What are you doing now?— Travelling for a firm at Auckland. Not a very strong firm. What is your Income?— £2 10s at least and expenses. No definite arrangement has been made. Mr. Matthews: You. expected the summons on which the order wns made? — Yes. - You came to the court to get it?— Yes. You went to your solicitor, Mr. Tuch and told him you DID NOT WANT TO APPEAR. Why?— -Because I wanted tho thing kept out of ; court. ' The night .before the case came on you went to Sydney? — Yes. How long was it before you wrote your wife? — Some time. Horo is a letter written by you. m which you say, "I will not send any money to Auckland for your support." Now, after you went to Sydney, you returned, saw your children coming from the Devonport school, and knowing that your wife would have you arrested when she know you were m Auckland, you loft tho same day for Sydney?— l wanted to sco my children. You knew that tho courts were closed and that wo could nut get it warrant for your arrest, and that's why: you wont straight back to Sydney?— I went back , to my work. Mr. Matthews Intimated that he would call Mrs. Graham, but his Worship had no two opinions about thu matter, and said It was not necessary.' His Worship then said that tho grounds put forth by Graham had no merits m them. He was of opinion' that tho "ploun one" was a man of moro than ordinary ability and could earn good monoy, and waa able to pay 30a por week. Tho application was, dismissed with costs £1 Ip. lawyer Matthews evidently did not think ho had much chaneo of getting his guinea, as ho hintod'thal if by aeel- ! dent it did come along he would hand "j it to some charity. -i