Poverty of the Rich

Taranaki Herald, Volume L, Issue 12255, 14 May 1903, Page 3

Poverty of the Rich

MR BEEOHAM'S WIFE TO LIVE ON £2500 A YEAIi.

Sir Francis Jeune on March 13 laixi society under an obligation by deciding that it is possible for the wife of a rich man, separated from her husband, to live without the slightest disjoomfort on £250(X a year. The la,dy in the case which called forth this notable decision was Mrs Beecham, wife of Mr Joseph Beecham, the celebrated pill manufacturer of St Helens, and it was on tjie ground that it was not possible to live on such a paltry sum that ahe appliejd to Sir Francis to vary an order already made by which alimony to that amount was fixed by the registrar of the v Court under the judical separation which s"he obtained from Mr Beecham in 1901. When Mr Hugo Young, K.C., urged on Mrs Beeoham's behalf that sihe could not keep Jbhe indispensable carriage and horse's on less than £500 a year, Sir Francis smiled, and offered to tell Mr Young— if he liked — what a carriage and pair need cost. "T have recently discussed it with my own coachman/.' he explained. PROFITS OF PILL-MAKING. Unfortunately, Mr Young was unt curious to know. But be urge.', that it was really impossible for Mrs Beeoham to live ia the wuy she wts entitled to live; to have nice rooms in which to reo.si.ve her fiicnds, to drive her own carriages, have a box at t>if» opera, aNd "»o go to. i^tumes fc-r the winter, on only XJ."OO a year. "I don't kn^w about, tha 1.-ox at tie opera," said the President, t-L-o j> ing hjs head, ''but it ought to provide the horses ant enrfiaijs, etc., if the money is spsot on iho.Lj. » j-houid ht=ve said £25)0 was quito enough, and that people in London do these things on that income. 1 ' With great :esource Mr Ycaujg posited out that before you can drive your own horses and carriago jou have to buy tlhem. An.l t«3 go and stay at Cannes for, say, two locnths in the winter, living on the urst floor of a hotel, made a vary seiHous hole in £1000. Mrs Bee-ahaTn's claim for a higher s)um than £2500 a jear wa3 based on the, fact, which ghe alleged, tihat her husband has an income of £30,000 a year from his pill business and a total income of £80,000 a year. On Mr Beecham's part, an income of £20,000 a year was admitted, although the highest estimates were denied. IN A LUNATIC ASYLUM. The question whether Mrs Beecham could live on £2500 a year was slightly complicated by a dispute between Mr Beeeham and his elder sion and . daughter, Mr Tom Beecham and Miss Emily Beecham. A few years ago Mr Beecham, it appeared, placed his wife in Northampton Lunatic Asylum. After a time her son, Tom, made efforts, which proved successful, to secure her release; and while sihe was still' in the asylum began proceedings on her behalf to obtain for her a judicial separation, which was granted on the ground that Mr Beecham was living with a lady at Willestden. T ( he relations between Mr Beechaan and his son became strained, and the father now objected to his wife's alim;ony being raised to more than ! £2500, on the grQu'nd that Mrs Beecttam was simply trying to obtain money to support her son and daugjhter, as well as herself, and to enable her slon to marry a young laidy to wjhom Mr Beecham objected. Mtie Beecham, w/ho is now 50 years of age, was helpirig her mother a& a dressmaker when she was married. It was now put forwatfd that in view of that cirdumstance £2500 a year , was enough for her. Mr Hugo Young pirotested against the idea that because the lady was once a dressmaker Sthe was not now entitled to share her husband's great wealth. He pointed out that Mr Beecham occupied a good position,' arid ha 4 been Mayor of St Helens. " ME BEECHAM'S OFFER. Sir Francis Jeune laughed at this. "I confess frankly," h» t-aid, '"that does not impress me. It iray be my ignorance ol provincial affairs, " he addji. shrugging hi-i thouMera. Mr Priestley subsequently onnoimc ed v*at Mr Bee^mm was willing to dirr/t that the £2500 a yup,r should be i aid to Mrs Pwtbftm after hjs clauih, if he disa besi)ro her. . s ':!' Francis Jelune exp««wed ins satis-ac-t?on arid conyjlims'i ;i ATr llug-. Young on halving sheared the offer for his client. In bis judgment, S»x francis saiJ that he mlust take into con.-'rl.'raruii tho fact "tihat Mrs Beecham was ct hun»ble origia". If a lady of a family of great wealth and r-^Jtion married a man and tjhey separated, one must consMer the cir'cumti.talaces in which Bhfthaid been brought up. But i? a laßy was of bjumble orioin it -wafc reasonable to say ihat when .she ' had to. 1 live by. herself ahe could not, and muat not. reqfuiro the Rame siurrouridings which' a person of different extraction would have required. Of course, since her, marriage Mrs Beeoham had enjoyed her hust>antcr& wealth. But sihe was now living apart, and he could not consider tlhe position of the son amd 'daugh/ter^ wSu>" must settle their relations with tiheir father themselves. He came to the conclusion that £2500 was a protper slum for Mr Beecham to allow her, and, therefore, would not vary tiho order ma r de. Mrs Beecham's summons Was dismissed, up .onder being made as to costs. :