A HARD CASE.

Otago Witness, Issue 1383, 1 June 1878, Page 5

A HARD CASE.

At the Dnnedin E.M. Court, on the 27th ult., a case disclosing rather peculiar circumstances, was brought before Mr J. Bathgate, R.M. It appeared that a short time ago an assault case, Deuchras v. Reid, oame before that Court and heavy damages were awarded. The defendant was then brought up on a judgment summons, and an order was made for the payment of the debt, in default the defendant to undergo a terra of imprisonment. The latter part of the order was enforced on Saturday last, and as the wife of the defendant was in an advanced state of pregnancy, sh9 and her four children would be left unprovided for. Mr Denniston made an application on behalf of the unfortunate woman, that her husband should be released from gaol, saying he thought it was a case for the Magistrate's interference. Mr J. H. Harris swd he strongly opposed the application on behalf of the plaintiff in the case. The assault was a very aggravated one, and the defendant had admitted in crossexamination that he would rather go on Bell Hill than pay the debt. Judgment had been given for Ll6 without costs, and the defendant had only to pay 5i a week, being in receipt of L 2 153 a-v/eek iyages when ho was before the Court on the judgment summons. He paid one week's instalment on the 29th of December, and then voluntarily left the employment he was in, and made a threat that he would go away from the town where he could not be found, so thafc he could nob bo compelled to pay the money. Although the circumstances were distressing, the man had bronchi; it all on himself. He submitted that if His Worship acted under the suggestion made by Mr Denniston to release the defendant, proceedings of the kind for the payment of debts would result in a perfect sham. Tho statute might aa well be swept away ac once. If the woman and children did suffer, it was not cbe fault of the plaintiff. He objected to the apolication being of an ex parte nature, an he had not an opportunity of getting auy evidence on the matter.

Mr Donniston maintained that it was not a matter concerning the other side at all. The man was in k.iol and had no money. It was a case for his Worship to decide.

Mr Bathgate said he would like to hear what the woman had to say in the matter.

Mrs Eeid having entered the witness-box stated that her husband • was a labourer, and be was last employed in Dunedin at A. and T. Burt's for nine months at the rate of L 2 10a a week. As work was getting very slack there, and he did not know that he might not be dismissed any day, he left and went up country harvesting for four months. During that time he sent her LlO. He came back three weeks ago, and had been laid up for a fortnight. He was arrested on a warrant on Saturday night. She had four children, the eldest being eleven years of ago, and was approaching confinement. She bad a house rented for 7s a week, and owed about LlO. She had been maintaining herself by washing. — In cross examination by Mr Harris she said her husband had intended never to pay the debt.

Mr Bathgato said ho recollected that he had made the order pretty severe, as the defendant had stated he would not pay the debt, and it was a very proper thing for him to do at the time. The statute only enforced imprisonment for refusal to pay a debt when there was ability to pay it. The man would get out of gaol by filing a declaration of insolvency, :is ho had no ability to pay the debt. If there was the slightest suspicion that the defendants had money in their possession he would not interfere, but under the peculiar circumstances he thought it was a case where the Oourt might very properly interfere. If Mr Harris had any reanon to doubt the statement made by the wife the case would be continued for a day to give an opportunity of hearing evidence on tho other side. The application was granted.