Hide Article Text (OCR)
THE SOUTH WESTERN TIMES, SATURDAY, JULY 8, 1922—Sometimes!y whenINTERESTINGMAINTENANCE CASEyour separation ?—Oh, how No: I have too much pride inAt this stage the witness brokeiOD’S(..I.- Mr.relay uftiHewn and sobbed gently. Then when she had pattly regained her composure, she said “1 could no more ih.uk .f return dip my hushand, bu-• 011.0 h. has Iven living with anothervo num.Is he still living with the woman T I know: up to a few weeks,i( SALE!prised thai no application for a variation had been made earlier. At the pVvsoni time the defemnnl only anticipated earning t'12 • a week. From the evidence it appeared that Baird iva-* supporting .«mone else, whom he hud no Hr hr to, and he woubl have to l; * n-.ric, ,.f thjit. Apparently dur-?K*ingnaid ihvtnt had Wen able to ear« :umo additional money, but now '•he w8-s nimble to, it was only fair that tlii* lo-is ■‘hnultl be iuuiIc up by her husband, lie intended to put the wife in the same position she had boon in before, nnd would increase the in*r the order 25/-agum.de-eduction ten out ening. glisten-rems ofi in the Police Court, when Wil-i Caird was charged that on June u failed t«i comply with an order — he Ci.url made at Grccnbushes on ‘anyhtw..1 22, I'.M'*, fur the maintenance of James J. Brown, of Worsley, said vifc. Hih wife also asked that the he had J.nown Baird for 12 years.•an! f the order bp increased. From the beginning of that time till r. (\ K. Jenour, of Messrs. Money, December last, he was working for I amount by l and Kastman, represented the Millars. Hi.s earnings from August per week, leant. Mr. F. D. Slcc acting for were as follow*.:— £11 G/3 Aug- Costs w defendant. u*l; £28/8 - September; £24/0/6 Oc- fendant.i the outset Mr. Sice objected to tober; £16. 12/9 November; £17/2/:* {*umimins. which he considered was December, and some back pay which I :ullicicnl to bring the defendant'he collected in January—£5/1?/-. Dur-, re the Court. Jing the five months he nvviagedjr. b-nuur: I lake it the defendant £2*5 '8/10 n month. Witness did not. jW l*- fore the ( uurt 7 know the upplicant (Mrs. Baird). Her SJce. Yea. knew Mr. Baird was supposed to be Sir.-I mUst apoligbe to Heavilyi’. Jenour said the application • living with his wife and two children. ] Taxed” for making an error in calcu-e out of an order made in 1913 at j The Mrs. Baird he knew was not the | lotions in my reply of the Cth, in which enbimhcs, 'v hen Warden Owen or-j one in Court- He must be keeping J I show a property rented at 33/-pcrCORRESPONDENCEBl'NBLRlrod that ii blink !Hull'll the drfundant lo pay mnintun-j two hornet, he added with some 9a-Jance at Ihu rate of £1 a week. Afpli- gacity. Witneaa said that Baird work-I ration was now made to have the or- |ed as a hewer and occasionally as a • ucr varied. The applicant had one shoesmilh. She had known it as a ! child, a girl of 12 years, and they had ! regular thing for hint to work all the no means of support other than that week including Saturday and Sunday. I received from the defendant. | Is this lady you know as Mrs. BairdThe K.M.: What is incorrect about ■still there*—Well, she was there this the summons ? morning.Mr. Slee: Its form. Is she absent occasionally?—I don'tMrs. E. G. Baird said she was liv- know.week should be rated at £44.The correct figures are as follows:— 52 weeks at 33/- —£86. Deduet 20per cent leaving £68 10 -. Then deduct the rates and taxes which are:— Water £3 18/-, Sanitary* £2 10/- and Municipal £9/17/2, a total of £16/5/2. This leaves £52/4/10, and allow the 4/10 for land tax which makes the rateable value £52.Why the Perth property is rated atEVERWFr.It’s t\neyAYand you Sir for the waste of space. Yours etc,GEO. E. CLARKE.Bun bury, 7th July.rth while.OD’SOU SAVE.•nccr-street, Bunbury. She You don't know whether she is there £35 1 cannot tell as the Act is veryi order against her husband or not? —Well. 1 see her nearly every- j clear, vix: Tye fair average rental, lesa[for £1 a week maintenance in addi- day. She lives right against the sta- j20 per cent and all rates and taxes,j tion to which he paid 9/- a week tion. Again apologising to Heavily Taxedj through the State for the child. There If she was away for a month yon ' ^was £5 in arrears to date. She found would notice it ? —Oh yes, of course, that £1/9/ - a week was insufficient Legal atgumunt then ensued on the upon which to support herself and question of whether the summons had child. She had no other means of sub- [ been properly made out. Mr. Slee I sislence and was not strong enough j pointed out that the complaint n-| to do much work, although once a week ferred to arrears, while no mention I she did some work for her sister-in- was made of this in the summons, law, for which she received 4/-. i Therefore he contended the Court[ In answer to Mr. Slee, witness said [could not take cognisance of the claim I she rented portion of a house for 6/- [ for arrears. A further objection was [a week, getting her own meals.1 r-ii?ed by Mr. Slee. The original or-[ Her child was living with her [ der had been made in the Blackwood and she had no waySir—In a letter published in your paper on the above subject Mr. Tipping suggests that in opposing the loan of £8,000 I may have an ulterior motive” He is right for once. My ulterior motive is to see all reactionary Councill-buying 1 magisterial district, and he contended 0rs resign office. But there is alsoWATER BOARD MATTERS.result friendly neigh- I hat the R.M. wasStreets.; clothes.bors gave her some, and she made ! alter it in the Wellington district, do as best she could. She hod done After much discussion the R.M. no real work for years, being in ill- j said that the Court held that the ac-hcatlh. She denied ever going under 11 ion was properly brought in respect ' the name of Smith, and expressed her of variance. He would note the ob-' deep sorrow that she had ever taken I jociions, however.: the name of Baird. ! Mr. Slee said that as the applicant| At this stage a letter signed “E. , did not wish to make any alteration Smith, in the handwriting of Mrs. i lo the summons, the matter of arrears , Baird, was exhibited. At first the could not be considered at present, witness said she did not know any- William Baird, a slee pel'-cutter, ofcompetent to another motive with which Mr. Tipping is well acquainted but which he takca care not to hint at. The detailsI E OVER A DOGthing about the letter or the signature, but later remembered that in 1916 she had written to a Mrs. Lonsdale and had aigned herself “E. Smith, the reason being that she was wishing to get certain information ubout her husband and his whereabouts without his knowing it.The Magistrate asked who Mrs. Lonsdale was, and the witness volunteered “That is the woman my hushand has been living with for years, and added “She's not a lady, she's aWorsley, said he was at present out of employment, although he hoped to start again on Monday. For the last six months he had earned about £3 aIKAV'V COSTS.andIn 1920, when Mr. Baldock was Mayor, the Water Board borrowed £2,000 for the specific purpose of buying a pump. (The same old pump). In September 1920 the Board lent the Electric Light Department £1,500 of this money to save two interests. According to the last balance sheet, it appears that the present council, instead of paying that money back into the loan fund, charged it back to the Board for pumping water, week. Millars' had cut out” the bush Mr. Tipping should be well aware years ago and it was a hard job to ^ „ new Council should make it its gel sleepers. He did not expect to business to ascertain whether that make more than £3 a week during the amount couW be recoverable, either winter. When the Court order was j out of thl, private pockets of individu-made in 1913 he was earning about £4 a|s councillors, as shown under cer-* weck u COKt nearly double to live tajll Mction3 0f the Act, with which 1 now, and he was not in the last of j nnderstand Mr. Tipping is now tragi-health. He was willing to take his j cally famUiar i„5Uad of attributing woman! | wife and child back, j an ulterior motive to me with a sug-When asked by Mr. Slee what she The R.M.: But how would you got' ^jtive sniff, it would have been more meant by the concluding phrase, “I;on with two wives? straightforward and manly to admitThe witness said there was no ques- that ht. knew I was out to see if thatthe West and have been :of two wives. The other woman£1,500 cannot be recovered to the rate-lt;v -I a lenient won mude by ill. when nskod bv the C. T. Wood) ut I he Police 'ridiiy. how he pleaded on y keeping mi unregisteredMUNICIPAL WASTE.imr ( m»re-enfiiig Money.Kn si main) appearing- •»»ilie Banbury ltoad Board, l he eluirgc. -aid I hut Mr. •\ in employee of the .1. - llo* dog in • | ue I ionn-imiiw. The dog Intel been -e—imi n| Troll for some le I imr, mid 110 rcgi-tnilion innl kid tiiken phier.-ii'id *ainl thnl Hie doglung in him, bill followed1. mnl im- nIm n v — ii knitM.: If ton nlioM ;« dog t« it idtoiit vonr premises voiVM lit.ve I he right I., de.nr: Tin ..reused **id| Imd had n litter of, this dog. The Noud il intend to bein (he • -se. They hadried since,” she said she supposed itreferred to her husband. Mr. Baird | was there at times, but she was not, pa'yeI* whether he and his interestedis the only one 1 have ever married I his Wife. She had left home through , fricnda ,.hajra or „ot.—in my life, and I am very sorry for ill-trcatmenti. On one occasion Us Yours, etc., it, she said. i wile had thrown £*33 into the flames | CHASDo you remember living at Wors- * of the fire because a carrier would not I BUnbury, July 7.ley?—That's where 1 got married. I take her into Collie from Worsley.] ’ _Your husband gave you money re- j On another occasion when they were gularly there?—Y'cs, because we were [moving they had to camp four miles living together. i away from home. In the morning hisDo you remember hini giving you (wife refused to leave where she was a considerable amount of money in j at West Collie. It ended by her jump-notes, which you throw into the fire? mg into the creek, waist deep. He —I call myself a Christian and I am [had lo send to Collie for Dr. Rigby, sitting here on oath. 1 never threw | who examined her and ordered her his money into the fire. • to hospital. Sometimes when he wentWere you in the habit of wandering [ home jpr meals he found them, half-through the bush?—No, never. [cooked, thrown around the door. HisYou have never got hold of your I clothes would be thrown out and his child and thrown her down on the, wife under the bed. His wife had ground: perhaps when you have had [gone to Quairading with him and on a violent temper?—No, but I was j one occasion they thought she had quick tempered. | wandered into the bush. A partySometimes when annoyed, eh ?— went in search, arrangement being When 1 was angered, I had occasion , made that whoever found her should to gut cross. ; fire a gun. After two hours searchWould you throw yourself down and he found her under the bed with the tear your clothes off?- No, 1 had more child, who was crying. When he respect for myself. I went to fire off the gun he found sheThe R.M. interposed by saying that [had broken it. Dr. White would not all he wanted to know was if the or- | admit her to the Xortham Hospita* der Was not sufficient. | possibly as the result of a note fron j Dr- c Edgar Ford, examiner forMr. Slee: I would like to show your Ir. Kigby, saying he would not havi tht. Trinity College of Music, London,’Phone 1BREACHA youug Kiev.in appeal (Mr. G. T. ' Court on FridtRailway Static without Inwtu wit, 13 river ■ hard, and one of the species less length thi schedule. Thet ■ ■We a:To the Editor.Sir,—1 wish to point out that Mr. J. G. Baldock, in his letter, missed one most important item of scandalous waste in municipal administration. I refer to the erection of feed elevators at the electric ligrht station, at a cost it ia said, of £180 to the ratepayers. This was never used for one minute, and has now been pulled down.—Your®JONATHON.PERSONALair. thidlow. of the National Bank, Wagin, but recently of Bunbury, shortly takes delivery of a new Buick “4.” The body is unusually attractive, being white enamelled, with gold lines....runllWorship that the defendant would be ] her crying around there. The alleges will rid of the lady at £5 a week. ground of the separation was cruelty. Do you remember going to Worsley but he 'lid not defend it. A separa-with your husband?—Yes, before we .tion had previously been drawn up got the separation.Oo you remember jumpingThula 40/-M. imposed a line of -. amounting to £2 3 8. the •inir six dnv-' imprisonment.creak on the way?—No.Have you any relations 7—Yes, but | they don't support me; they are in Queensland.Any relations in Western Austra-Ilia?—Yes, but I don't get a farthingarrived in Western Australia by the R.M.S. Orvieto last Saturday. It is understood that his first examination in this State takes place at Camar-fcy Mr. Ewing, but she would not abide jvon his trip occupying two or three the by it. The value of a load of sleepers [ vecks_ u ic not anticipaed that heimlh thad dropped from £4 to £2/15/, and ^ vlajt t],e South-West before Sep-bc could not cot more than U loads [ ^mper, but nothing definite is yet a week. He was not supporting the known by the local secretary, woman and children referred to. Mrs.Crowd did work of her own and got Miss Edith Buckley, a recent arrival money. She was keeping herself on- | from England, has taken up a positionfrom her. I only want the support t ruly, having a borrding house and with Messrs. Wilks and Peters during my life of William Baird, my confectionery shop at Dwetlingup and Bridgetown. She was motored throughSHIPPINGRT OF BUNBl/RT ESBEUS IN PORT.Durham. s.a.. with cargo ofis. s.».. for rtmher.s.*,, fur limtirr. xmtn, s.s., for timber.■ Williams, schooner, for timber.husband.You have been receiving money since 1313?—Yes.Would you bo willing to return to your hupHand?—No, I would not. I have too much pride in my body. I would rather rear up my child alone. I will cling to my child as long as I live.Mr. Jenour in re-examination re turned t« the lrtter to Mr?«. LonsdaleWho i-« this woman?- She hn* h«*ei living with mv husband for eight years.Why did you write that latter?— To find out if she was still living with him.fls’ e you been lirirg with aev manManjimup. Mrs. Crowd hail uu claim | by Bunbury friends on Sunday last, on him whatever, although he admitted she had lent him money to keep ' On Wednesday evening, June 28,out of debt. farewell evening was tendered Mr. andThe R.M. t*nid he did not intend to j Mrs. R. Davies in the Miners' Insti-f 11.» a»v notice of the complaint, ex- j tute, Greenbushes, by the committee j . e 'I fur as rhe application for the of that institution. The evening took j a Hn»inn of !he order was concerned j the form of a social and dance, and , Mr. Slee asked that no increase be ! was well attended. The chairman of I rr sn,Baird wns making less wages 1 the committee presented Mr. Davies j ihan in 1013, although the cost of liv-1 with a very* nice pocket wnllet, and in | i. it. had «i*cn considerably. It would J doing so, regretted the departure of* P.- more satisfactory, he remarked, if their guests from Greenbushes, but | I he parties were divorced. wished them every success in their*Mr. Jenour pointed out that the high new home. The chairman's remarks l cost of living entitled the woman to I were supported by Messrs. J. Lindsay I an increase. land D. H. Gibbney, after which Mr. IThe R M -aid he was rather sur- Davies suitably responded.
Newspaper Details
Bunbury Southern Times
Bunbury, Western Australia, AU
Sat, Jul 08, 1922
Page 5
Full Page
Clipped by
Anonymous
AU 31 May 2025
Other Publications Near Bunbury, Western Australia
Bunbury Herald
Bunbury Herald and Blackwood Express
Bunbury Southern Times
Bunbury Southern Advertiser
Bunbury South Western Times
