A MAINTENANCE CASE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6362, 17 December 1898, Page 5

A MAINTENANCE CASE.

.$. — - — THE, JUDGMENT. In the maintenance case, Catherine Copper v. George Edward SilK, in which, it will be remembered, the complainant sought to compel the 'defendant to provide for the maintenance of his illegitimate twin children, Mr Beetham, S.M., gave judgment in the Magistrate's Court this morning. Mr M'Connel appeared for the complainant, and Mr Russell for the defendant. His Worship said :— ln this case the paternity is admitted, but the liability of the defendant to support the twins is disputed, and an agreement drawn up by a solicitor in Dunedin, by whom I understand Mr Russell is instiructed, and,, signed by the complainant and her mother before the birth of the children, is set np-as a defence to the complaint. The agreement provides, inter alia, that, in consideration of the sum of £75, the complainant and her mother bind themselves not to make any claim upon the defendant for the maintenance of the infant or infants that may be born, and that they will maintain the infant or infants and keep him (the defendant) harmless and indemnified from all claims whatsoever in respect of the said infant or infants. Of this £575 the complainant and her mother received the sum of £54 193 in cash and promissory notes. The last oi this money was paid in July, 1898. and the children were born on Oct. 17, 1898. At the date of the complaint the whole of this money appears to have been spent. It has evidently been applied to the maintenance of the complainant during her pregnancy, and also to the maintenance and use ot the complainant's mother and an invalid daughter. The complainant and her children are now destitute. The question 4s, can an order now be made, under Section 9 of the Destitute Persons Act, against the defendant for the support of these children? I am of opinion that the order can arid should be made. It is quite clear that, under Section 14 of the Act, the moment the mother of these infants becomes destitute, and the children are maintained at the public expense, the putative father of the children can be obliged to maintain them, notwithstanding any composition he may have made, even though that composition may have been made under the authority of the Destitute Persons Act or any other Act. He cannot contract himself out of his responsibility for the maintenance of his children when they are destitute. It appears to me that the money paid to the mother under the agreement was not closed with a trust that it should be applied solely to the maintenance of the children. Clearly it is only just that a portion of it should be applied to the maintenance of the mother during her pregnancy ; and who shall say how much of it she trequired for that purpose ? The principle involved in this case is fully discussed in Griffith v. Evans, " Law Times" Reports, vol. 46, page 117, and in the New , Zealand case, Elmers v. Elmers, which was an appeal from this Court. Again, assuming that the money paid under" the agreement was intended to be applied towards the maintenance, of the children and for no other purpose, the defendant has made the mother the agent for its disbursement, and he must, I think, accept her dealings with the money as his own. An agreement of the nature of the one here relied upon is, in my opinion, absolutely invalid against the claims of the mother for the support of her children. The order will go. I only make it for a weekly allowance — the money the mother received should have been amply sufficient to pay all expenses incidental to the- birth, even taking into consideration the extreme prodigality of Nature in this instance. The order will be for 6s a week for each child, the defendant to pay solicitors' costs £2 2s, and find two sureties of £75 each for the fulfilment of the order.

There are few people in I clergyman the colonies who have not and heard of Dr Bevan. In i burglar. Melbourne there is no i better known personality than that of the Independent Church pastor. Every residont knows the familiar figure, tho spectacles, the clerical air, the rubicund complexion, the massive head, ■ surmounted by a quantity of snowy white hair. The doctor has a penchant for politics, and has necessarily made some political enemies. But his personal foes are few, if any. His own unfailing courtesy usually disarms hostility, even of those who decline to take his politics seriously, and have not much sympathy with his particular religious denomination. It is-possible, however, that even some of the enemies of the Doctor sympathised with him over an adventure which bofel him a few days ago. Certainly the affair presented some novel features, although while it lasted it must have been anything but agreeable to the party most directly interested. ' At 2 a.m. on Tuesday (says the ''Age" of Dec. 7), Dr Bevan, who resides at Hawthorn, extinguished the light in his room and went to sleep. At about 2.40 something — he knows not what — awakened him. The room was illuminated by the candle, which had been relighted^ond the first object which caught his eye was a revolver, pointed at his forehead, and grasped firmly in a man's hand. The Doctor asked, in as firm a voice as he could command, " What do you want ?" " I want your ring, Doctor," replied the burglar. He spoke in a quiet, persuasive way, and the two immediately started an interesting conversation, Mr 3 Bevan listening in silence, with remarkable coolness and courage. The Doctor was resourcefuL He put it to the other, as a man, that the ring was a " present from his mother, in special circumstances," aud that he " didn't want to part with if." The Doctor stated his case forcibly, but tho other more so. "I must have it," he said. " Don't compel me to shoot you, Doctor." The man kept the Doctor covered with the revolver, but seemed to have scruples about shooting him. Declining after fully a»minute's hesitation to discuss the matter further with Dr Bevan, he turned to his wife as likely to be more amenable to reason, and said: "You have some jewellery, Mrs Bevan.; let me have some and I'Jl go." Unlike her husband, Mrs Bevan did not stop to argue with the man. After asking him if he would really go, and being- assured that lie would, she got out of bed, went to a part of the room where she had concealed a diamond ring, took it, and presented it to the burglar- unconditionally. He satisfied himself at a glance that it was all right, climbed down one of the posts into the garden, and disappeared without making any further remark. Mrs Bevan saw him off the premises. The Doctor considered it useless, perhaps unadvisable, to go in pursuit of him. He woke his son, who telephoned for the police. The police arrived with as little delay as possible, but the man had got away, and succeeded in evading capture. Needless to say the affair .created a sensation in Melbourne, and Dr Bevan received numerous congratulations on having come through it with no worse results than the loss of a little jewellery and a night's rest.

The tendency of the "things one Irish orator to entangle would his metaphors is a favourite rather have theme with humorists. expressed What reason there is tor dif- fathering the practice on to feuently." Irishmen has never been satisfactorily shown. An English newspaper has been collecting specimens of "bulls" that belon? to a variety of nationalities, and the result of the collection tends to show that one nation is as liable to these blunders as another. We have heard a Christchurch man speak of "an empty theatre of unsympathetic auditors," and the remark | was allowed to pass without comment. ! Some of the specimens collected by the ; English paper havo th& charm of novelty. A Pope is said to have described some ( opinion which he disliked as " setting ; forth like a serpent to" bite the barque of

the Church." Perhaps the learned Pontiff meant a "sea-serpent," but, on the face of ifc, the phrase reminds ono of the rat which Sir Boyle Roche "saw brewing in the air." Mr Curaon mixed his metaphors when he congratulated his audience on the circumstance that "though not out of the wood, we have a good ship"; while Mr MaoHugh once described Irish authorities as "iron-bound in red-tape." Some other examples are unmistakably Irish. When the priest of Ballymalocbeg exclaimed: "The very children, who are not old enough to speak or walk, are running about the streets cubing and blaspheming like fiends," the reverend gentleman's mental processes were 'evidently confused. Perhaps he thought of a miracle. But he is not more miraculously inclined than the Edinburgh Reviewer, who says that "Prince Charles Edward rode down to the French bank," just after Malplaquet, whereas that hero was not born till many years later. This last, however, is not so much a bull as a case of error in chronology. There is not much to be said in extenuation of the man who wrote, " Looking back along the tnackleßS pathway of the future he descried the footprints of an invisible road." These example? are for-the most part taken from past history, but an apt collector would probably find no difficulty in collecting others as good. The " bull " is a form of speech that occurs unexpectedly and dies hard.

The fact that great writ the trash ers occasionally begin their of a gbeat career by writing trash, and poet. that of themost pronounced type, is one on which literary aspirants may bo forgiven for dwelling with some degree of complacency. There is hope for every would-be author if the successful author has begun badly. Just now literary circles in England have had their attention drarwu-.to the earlier poetry of one of the admittedly great writers of the century. When Shelley was-eighteen years oldie, in conjunction with his sister Elizabeth," published a small volume of verse purporting to be "Original Poetry, by Victor and Cazire." These verses have been unearthed, as we mentioned the other day, by some indefatigable admirer of the poet, edited and published in book form. As we said, they were the work of Shelley when he was eighteen years old, and could nofc-be: expected: to be anything but immeasurably inferior ±o his later work. But even at the age of eighteen genius has been known to show itself. Chatterton at seventeen -was almost famous. Pope, at the age of eighteen, had done really good work. Shelley's wife,., Mary Godwin, was only nineteen when she wrote " Frankenstein." But this " Original Poetry " written by Shelley at an age at which some dawning of native talentmight have been expected to show itself, is remarkable as showing how badly a great poet can write before he has any claim to be called a writer. According-to the verdict of all the critics, there is not a line or I phrase in the " poetry " of " Victor and Cazire" that gives the slightest promise of future talent or even competence. "Execrable doggerel," declares the critic of an English paper, than whom there is no more ardent admirer 01 the-Shelley of six or seven years later. There are two verses in the collection which are -said to stand out from the remainder, 'and- for that reason are thought not to be Shelley's. It is known that Shelley was largelyinfluenced by slonk Lewis, and he is thought to have plagiarised them from him. One of the verses may be quoted : See ! O'er yon rocky height Dim mists are flying 1 . See by the moon's pale light, Poor Lauras <lying. When these verses "stand out from the remainder," the character of the remainder may be jtidged. The ""Saturday Review," in tones of entreaty, asks the editor of the verses, Mr Richard Garnett, to withdraw them from circulation. The " Daily Chronicle," on the other hand, thinks their publication unnecessary, but inevitable ; " inevitable, because it is not in human nature to let anything perish that is authentically associated with so great a name as his." The truth, no doubt, is with the " Daily Chronicle." There is not likely to be a run on the poetry of " Victor and Cazire," but the existence of the monumentally bad poetry of a great author may do something, if only " pour encourager les autres." And Shelley is so great a poet that the verses can do him no harm.