Australian Access Federation

You are here: Home Corpora Corpus of Oz Early English 4-270 (Text)

4-270 (Text)

Item metadata
Speaker:
addressee author,male,Sydney Morning Herald,un
ns1:discourse_type
Newspaper Article
Word Count :
815
Plaint Text :
ns1:register
Public Written
ns1:texttype
Newspapers & Broadsides
ns1:localityName
http://dbpedia.org/resource/New_South_Wales
Created:
1892
Identifier
4-270
Source
Teale, 1982
pages
173-77
Document metadata
Extent:
4907
Identifier
4-270-plain.txt
Title
4-270#Text
Type
Text

4-270-plain.txt — 4 KB

File contents



Mr. Edward Maxted (the manager) read the following report on the desertion of wives and children: - 'I have the honour to again submit for your consideration certain matters bearing upon the ill-treatment and desertion of wives, as I find that this popular vice had become of such magnitude as to warrant special prominence and consideration with a view of inducing legislation for the relief of the unfortunate victims whose offspring, through destitution, are becoming expensive charges upon your institution and the State generally.  The matter was first brought under your notice in May, 1890, when, in response to a request from the institution, the Inspector-General of Police was good enough to cause special efforts to be made to capture deserters whose families were receiving relief, but unfortunately the results were unsatisfactory. The law as at present constituted affords but meagre relief - frequently none whatever - to the large number of women and children annually deserted by those who are legally and morally responsible for their support. The failure of parental responsibility is, of course, of serious moment, inasmuch as it is a great factor in the augmentation of the pauperism and misery of the community. It will be seen from statistics herein quoted, that our floating population of deserting husbands and fathers has now attained appalling dimensions; and unfortunately the legal remedies at hand are most inadequate to meet what is required in the matter of preventing pauperism as it is affected by these desertions. For instance, the deserter who cannot be traced by the police and the deserter who has been captured and imprisoned, are equally useless as bread winners for their families. Indeed, many wives, having this knowledge of the matter, refuse to prosecute their husbands for desertion, or, where they have prosecuted and the men have been captured, consent to live with them again and give them another trial - generally, however (so far as our knowledge of the matter goes), to endure a repetition of the brutality and neglect previously suffered for years, and subsequently ending in fresh desertion. The large number of cases dealt with by your asylum from time to time, has familiarised me with the drunkenness and cruelty of these men before the desertion of their helpless children, and I would, therefore, venture to suggest that the penalty for the crime is not sufficiently powerful to act as a deterrent. It may be said that the shortcomings of wives frequently influenced desertion by the husbands, and some of the women admit that trouble has been caused through their own unfortunate propensity for argument with the men at a time when the minds of the latter were unhinged through drink. Whatever allowances are to be made, however, there can be no possible excuse for men to permanently leave their children in want, or dependent on charity, as is done in hundreds of cases to which I am referring. . . The figures relating to the number of processes issued from the local police courts against men for maintenance are of considerable significance. Records show that not less than 623 warrants and summonses were issued against men who had failed to carry out the ordinary responsibilities of married life.
This is a serious matter, but I venture to say that the figures quoted convey but a limited idea of what actually takes place, as women are SO reluctant to seek aid through the police courts. But apart from the question of expense to the charitable institutions and the State caused by the delinquencies of deserting married men, the question of the previous ill-treatment of their wives might fairly be taken into account with a view of meting out to these men a fitting and special punishment when violent assaults have been resorted to before the desertion. The statements of hundreds of deserted and ill-treated women who appeal from time to time at the asylum, women who are found to be truthful, respectable, and good mothers, disclose that their married lives constitute a period of suffering and wretchedness which would lead one to infer that they had been living with savages rather than with civilised beings.  And although these statements are ex parte, a large amount of credence must be given to women of undoubted respectability. On the other hand, it is surely reasonable to assume that men who would deliberately leave their children in want would be quite capable of the other atrocities attributed to them by their wives. Taking haphazard a few of these cases relieved by the institution (and they are typical of hundreds), we find that in one instance a wife had been maintaining three children for nine years. During this term her husband (who had deserted) sent her in all £40. He was last heard of in 1889, when, in reply to letters from his wife and children, he coolly writes complimenting her on the maner 

http://ns.ausnc.org.au/corpora/cooee/source/4-270#Text