Mr Lionel Appleyard, solicitor, appeared for the wife and Mr JP Medley for the defendant.

Mr Appleyard said that an order was made against defendant for £1 a week (made up of 16s a week in money and house rent free). There were three children, all invalids and unable to walk. She had to get help in the house and she asked for the order to be varied for 25s a week. He had property in Leading Post Street and a fried fish business. She alleged that defendant lived with another woman.

Mr Medley: I suggest that you are vindictive towards your husband. You want to do him all the harm you can, and cripple him if possible?

Mrs Clack: No, I don't want to harm him at all.

Do you bet on horse-racing?

Not out of 16s a week.

Do you know Charles Raper?

Yes.

Have you sent him with money and slips of paper to bookmakers?

Not out of 16s.

What have you sent money out of?

Out of my own money, my own things.

Then you earn money yourself?

No, I don't earn money. I can't with three children to look after.

You said just now you did not send it out of the 16s; it was your own money?

The clerk: Mr Medley wants to know where the money came from?
Out of my jewellery. I could not do it out of 16s a week. I had to borrow money, and make it up the best way I could.

Do you know Mrs Hick, Parkin Lane?

Yes.

Had you a conversation three weeks ago with her, and did you not say: "I can do without that now. I am a good deal better off now than ever I was before. I have got my watch and chain out?"

No.

If Mrs Hick goes into the box and says that, she won't be speaking the truth?

No she doesn't very often, I am sorry to say.

She needn't come and tell lies about me.

Mr Medley submitted that fresh evidence should be forthcoming, but the clerk ruled that it was a question of means.

Defendant then went into the box and said that he was making a good deal less money now than in the season when the order was made. At the present time he was hardly making expenses – in fact he was running the place at a loss at the present time. His wife kept a servant, which she need not do. His earnings averaged about 25s a week. He honestly was unable to pay more than he was at present doing. He had done the best he could. He paid her rates – about £5. She had helped herself to potatoes and fish in the warehouse everyday she wanted, and he had said nothing to her.

Charles Raper was then called, and he stated that he had put bets on for Mrs Clack. This occurred sometimes everyday and sometimes two or three times a week. He had reckoned up the "odds" for her. She mentioned the Manchester Handicap to him, and he backed "Old China" for her.

By Mr Appleyard: He sometimes put 1s, 1s 6d, and 2s on for her.
Mr Appleyard: "Two shillings a day, that is about 10s per week; she could not put that on out of the 16s. What bookmaker did you put it on with?"

Witness gave a name.

Mrs Hick was then called, and said that Mrs Clack had told her she was more comfortable without him. She did not say anything about money.

Mr Medley asked for the case to be dismissed, stating that his client had done his best to fulfil the magistrates' order, and he was unable to pay more. On the evidence of the woman, she wasted money in betting, and she kept a servant.

The magistrates retired, and the mayor subsequently said that the bench had decided to increase the order to 24s a week that would be rent free, and a £1 a week.

Defendant: Well, I can't pay it, sir.