The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1910-03-15
WHEN CAN A MAN
PAY ALIMONY?
Court Directed Him to Pay Ahmony,
But he Claims to Have Been
Financially Unable.

Another opinion was handed down
bv the supreme court yesterday IN
,he Messervy case from Charleston
countv. the cause in which young
rirl is trying to collect alimony from
Ter husband, the son Of rich man:
b the opinion yesterday it Is held
lat Messervy can not be placed IN
Ail for failure to pay the ahmony'
Aither can the court force him to
~ remunerative occupation or
Profession.
A previous opinion in the case rul-
a that while Messervy did not have
Hanv means to pay the alimony yet
, he had a most valuable asset in the
nature of a strong body and that he
should use this in producing the nee
essarv funds. The opinion yesterday
is by Associate Justice Hydrick. The
case is that of Pearle C. Messervy
against her husband, John R. Mes
servy.
This is an appeal from an order
Of the circuit court committing John
R. Messervy to jail for contempt tor
failure to pay to Pearle c. Messervy
alimony and suit money according to
a. previous order affirmed by the SUI
preme court. The testimony IN the
case showed that Messervy is young
man of Limited education who has
no trade, profession or employment
and no property or income. Tha court
states that it does not appear that ne
has had at any time any steady en-
nlovment or that he has ever been
engaged in any business but that ne
has always been supported by MS
father who is man Of means.
In his sworn return to the rule to
show cause why he should not be at
tached for contempt, Messervy as
serted his inability to comply with
the order of the court. He said that
he had tried tn get work, but that he
had failed, and that, if he could OBJ
tain employment on account OF his
lack Of skill that he could not earn
more than enough to support him.
self.
The circuit court found as facts:
"That he has no property from which
he can derive an income and that ne
is without any income except such
as his father sees fit to allow him, -
and further "that his father will not
voluntarily allow him anything for
plaintiff and that were he disposed
to share with plaintiff aEy allowance
he might receive from his father, he
would have to do so without his faith
er's knowledge, or else such allow
ance would be disco ntlnued.
In the case the circuit court held
that Messervy had not made an hon.
est effort to get such work as he was
capable Of doing and as result ad-
JUDGED him in contempt.
The supreme court, in the opinion,
says:
"There is no doubt Of the obliga-
ton. legal and moral Of the appel
liant to support his wife. The court
has held that a judgment may be
given against husband for almony,
when he has neither property nor IN
come, but is able by the use OF his
faculties to provide maintenance TOR
her. In such a case, the wife IS en-
titled to the judgment, even though
it may be impossible for the court to
enforce its payment.
'sTThere is, therefore, no inconsis-
teney m the court decreelng all
mony in a case like this, even though
it may find itself unable to enforce
payment thereof. "
Continuing the opinion says, "But
we do not think the court can compel
a husband, who has no trade or pro-
fession, to learn trade, acquire a
profession or find employment, and,
by the exercise thereof, derive an
income for the support Of his wife.
If it could do so to enforce the pay
ment of a judgment for alimony, why
could it not do so to enforce payment
Of any other judgment?
1.-THE moral obligation to pay a
JUDGMENT for almouy may be great
er than the obligation to pay any
other, but there is no difference IN
the legal obligation. The court does
not undertake to enforce purely NOR
al obligations, nor cam it undertake
to make the thriftless thrifty.
1.-THE order of the circuit court IS
reversed, but without prejudice to the