THREE TIMES IMPRISONED

Taranaki Daily News, 4 October 1929, Page 13

THREE TIMES IMPRISONED

MAN’S DENIAL OF IDENTITY ■f’' • , MAINTENANCE CLAIM MABE. ■J ' REVIVAL OF . THE HOPE CASE. ( Wellington, Oct. 2. The story of an immigrant’s failure to convince the authorities that he was not the husband of a woman in Sheffield, to whom maintenance payments were due, is revived by the report the Public Petitions Committee presented to Parliament to-day on the petition of John William Hope, of Onehunga, who asked for an investigation into his wrongful imprisonment. ■ The committee recommended that his request should be granted, adding that the only way in which a .full investigation could be made was to send petitioner and his wife to England. '/./The claim of petitioner was that he had been imprisoned on three occasions in New Zealand,. varying from two two months to six months, for alleged -disobedience of a maintenance order made in. Sheffield, England. Petitioner stated that he was not the John William Hope mentioned in the order made in Sheffield in 1921. He said, in tracing his movements in various towns and his occupations, that he had never been to Sheffield. TORPEDOED IN WAR TIME. 1It was stated that one Jphn William Hope was married in 1916 in Sheffield, and the wife of that man was now claiming maintenance, as ..a,, result of which petitioner was imprisoned. Petitioner denied all knowledge of the woman who alleged she was his . wife ■ and who obtained the order against John William Hope' in Sheffield. .//Petitioner said that in 1916 he wa's /at' sea, but ho could not produce his discharges, foi" that year, as in 1917 he was on board a ship /of the. Larrinager Line in the North Atlantic -when she' was torpedoed and sunk by the Germans, and his discharges for all the previous periods from 1914 to that time were lost. When petitioner worked at the Manchester dry" docks for a period subsequent to, his coming ashore in 1919 there were employed at the particular work in which he was engaged as an electrician two men named John William Hope, namely, petitioner and another man, who bore a striking resemblance to him, and who actually informed petitioner that his wife resided in Sheffield. .: "MY ONE AND ONLY WIFE.” “I was married to my one and only wife, then, Edith Alice Barnes, at the Bolton registry office, England, on July 14, 1922,” affirmed petitioner. He added that on August 13, 1923, lie and his wife left for New Zealand. In April, 1924, he appeared before the Court in Auckland charged with failing to pay arrears of maintenance with respect to Mrs. Hope, of England, and although he protested that he was not the man wanted the late Mr. J. W. Poynton, S.M., held that he'was the husband; and sentenced'' hiim to six month’s imprisonment. • In April, 1925, petitioner was. brought before the Auckland Court ■ again, protesting his innocence. His counsel, Mr. J l . J. Sullivan, .communicated with the Minister of Justice, giving him all partculars relating to petitioner’s life in England. The Minister promised to look fhto the matter, and subsequently sent the Under-Secretary of Justice to Auckland, where he was supplied with all English details by Mr. Sullivan. Nothing, however, had been done. Petitioner was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment. He said he was ..sentenced to his last term of‘imprisonment on October 13, 1927, the order to be suspended so long as, ho contributed maintenance. Petitioner asked for an investigation into the whole matter, and appealed to the House because he had expended all his resources in contesting the case and eould not afford to take it further.