A LOVE LOAN AT 25 PER

NZ Truth, Issue 1044, 28 November 1925, Page 7

A LOVE LOAN AT 25 PER

WIDOW'S WOOER GOT HER CASH, THOUGH^ BANKRUPT Engagement, Divorce Plan, and A "Touching" Episode

Not always does the widow have the better of the deal. For instance, take the case of a young and, pretty Wellington widow whose troubles have lately been publicly ventilated.

Yearning once more to rest her pretty head and to lay her troubles on manly shoulders, Lulu Thompson, of Wellington, was sadly disillusioned after she had met Thomas William Welch.

* ' Welch came, saw, .-.•conquered. Within three or four weeks of their first meeting, she had not only become engaged but h*ad also Ment him £200 — without security, and he an undischarged bankrupt. ■■ '

, Twelve months afterwards she is still bereft of. her ,£2OO and 4 stilla widow. . *

IF Thomas William Welch is a Romeo} he certainly does not look like • one. ' "'..•'■■ Though the parties were both Sun- * day School teachers, they do not agree us to the facts". There is an apparent conflict, on the very vital point as to '_•}, whether Thomas William knew of the ' vwidow's £ 200 before he popped the Question — or vice versa. . * , DID HE TELL HER ? hAlsb, sad to relate, these theologions are directly at variance on the equally ~ vital point as to whether the gentlef man did, or did not, tell the lady that he was x an undischarged bankrupt, prior to the loan. The wjdow says he „ did not. And out of the. Cour£ proceedings that have: followed , arises also the t phantom of a wife and three childrenconcerning whom, however, Thomas William's lawyer remarked (m. some ,1 sort of mitigation) that. his client had not seen his wife for fifteen years and had, filed a divorce petition.. „ Whatever the divorce petition may be worth, it is evident that Lulu, when she linked up with William, was laying , y up for herself a store of trouble. . Perhaps the most "touching" part of the proceedings was the moment at the bold wooer — the male one— Jf became "despondent." I According to his story, his It despondency f which was financial I m quality, moved the widow to I offer him her P.O. Savings Bank l> money, but she fearec| he would be I "offended." I Her misgivings on this point were W not realised. The money passed. I And one of the problems the Magis- ■ trate had before him was whether a W widow would lend her savings to such I r lover if she had previously v been told I by him that he was an undischarged M bankrupt. I THE INTEREST. „ & Of course, some. .\v,o.me.n— eyen some ■ widows — are sentimental, very! MX But her.c, again, emerges another . ■ little fact — the loan, it was alleged, I. was to bear interest at the rate of V £1 a week! .. I On a £200 loan, the interest would ft be 25 per cent. •'.■ : H- No wonder that the Magistrate did Hnot get' very far into the psychological confronting him. B The action that brought the stoi'jj ■o light m the Magistrate's Court was application for a re-hearing of judgment summbns brought against by the widow for the £200 on 3 last. He looked anything an ensnarer of hearts, as he told a tale of penury and ill-health. Since August, he said, he had earned BB>nly £3 a week as a land salesman ■■intil September 12, and from then on had been confined to his bed with and bronchial influenza had earned nothing, the while his piled up. ■■- H The iVlagistrate (Mr. Riddell) allow - the re-hearing and set aside "the order. Evidence that Welch, previously a BBfinancial agent, Avas now an undisHfcharged bankrupt was , admitted by Leicester. Lawyer Wiren ap■■peared for the widow, a prepossessing

young woman who entered the box immediately and answered some" fornial questions. Then lawyer Leicester took a hand. " AD. " MEETING DENIED. How did you first become acquainted? Was it not through a matrimonial advertisement?— The lady com- ■ imiil!i'iiii!iiiii!iiiim!!m"i'mii"iimiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii"»"»>»» "■'" """ '«»»'"»»

menced to show signs of extreme agitation hereupon, but indicated that such was not the case. Well, then, how did you become acquainted? — I met him at a friend's place. And you became very friendly, did you not? — -Yes." . "Do I have to answer these questions?" said the "witness, appealinglyj to the Magistrate and shaking violently. She Avas given a chair, and the examination proceeded, the Magistrate remarking that 'he would wait to see the relevancy of the questions. Lawyer Leicester: Did you tell. Welch you .were getting a widow's pension of 30/- a week?:— l don't remember. : ' Well, you won't deny it?— No. Ydu were working at the Ambassador Cabaret, at the time?— Yes. You did not mention till you had become engaged to Welch that you had this money m the Savings Bank? — Witness made no reply. HE KNEW OF THE MONEY. .The Magistrate: Do you remember . becoming engaged to him? — Yes. Well, was it after that date? — He knew about' it four days' before the engagement. " ■ Lawyer Leicester: The way the money came to be lent was. that you were at his office one night, and he was despondent about his financial position, and complained to you that he was hard up, was it not? — No. Did you not hand him a note saying that you did not want to hurt his feelings but that you had certain moneys m the bank which he would be welcome to use? — No. " ■ ' You, had a formal engagement party at the Cabaret, didn't you? — Witness was here so extremely distressed that her answers were almost inaudible. Lawyer Wiren: l?ut at this time Welch was a married man with three children. Lawyer Leicester: That is incorrect. He had filed a petition for divorce and had not seen his wife for 15 years. The Magistrate: How did you come to lend him this £200?— He said he

was embarrassed for a couple of days. Lawyer Leicester: But did you nothave an arrangement to~get £ 1 a week interest? — Yes. And you have had nine payments of £ 1 each ? — Yes. To further questions witness was emphatic that Welch did not disclose to her until after the money was lent that he was an undischarged bankrupt. She understood he was m a good position. • "DON 'T BE OFFENDED. ' ' The defendant Welch was then called again and he related having advertised himself as a lonely man looking for a wife. One who replied was the plaintiff, and witness met her by appointment one evening m the bed-sitting-room of a friend m Abel Smith Street. Three or four weeks later the loan was made, and m the meantime they had become^ engaged. One night at his office she remarked that he looked despondent, and, slipping a pencilled note into his hand, he read: "Don't be offended, but I have about £300 m P.O. that I have, no use for, N and if £250 will help you, you are welcome." > Apparently Welch was not deeply offended by the intimation, for he accepted £200. The Magistrate: What was your financial position at the time? — I was an undischarged bankrupt. Lawyer Leicester: What was the condition of the loan? Was it to be returned m a, few days?— No, and she never asked me for a receipt, but I offered £1 a week interest and I paid that for nine weeks; £3 of it I paid back at our absolutely formal engagement party at the Webb Street Mission. SUNDAY SCHOOL SEAL. You were both Sunday School teachers there, were you not? — "Yes," said witness (and after a pause), "though I was an inactive one." Lawyer Wiren: And you say you did disclose to her before taking the loan that you were an undischarged bank-. i« U pt? — Witness was emphatic that he had. ;. Lawyer W-irent But she says you did not Lawyer Leicester: Well, they are both Sunday School teachers. Witness: Yes, and I have been living witlv the superintendent of the mission. • • Witness added that he earnestly wished to pay back the money when he got a chance, and would be as pleased to do so as she would be to receive it. The Magistrate, giving his decision, commented that the allegation of. fraud (the . alleged non-disclosure of the bankruptcy) was made late m the day. The matter was originally set down as a simple debt. The matter of proving fraud was equivalent to doing so m a criminal charge, m which case the law laid down that the charge be proved beyond doubt. NO' CASH, NO SECURITY. There stood the rule, said the Magistrate, and though one did riot like to doubt a lady's statement there was no evidence to support it. '■ One sympathised very much with the lady's position, being left without money or security, but m the circumstances of defendant it would not be right to make an order. "You must give him an opportunity to get some money together," added the Magistrate, "and ii' he does nothing within three months you can bring him up again. He says he is anxious to pay back the money, and he should try to act up to his statements."