Mr. Jacobs:

Mr. Chairman, there is an error as to the year of the marriage. I would ask that paragraph one be amended to correspond to the marriage certificate, as being the 13th day of March, 1954 instead of 1953.

This may have been a Friday. If it was, it was probably not too good a day because it would appear, just from reading this evidence and from drawing an inference, that this young girl, at that time only 19 years of age, on Friday the 13th, went down to the United States and got married probably without her parents' consent. At any rate, the marriage took place as proved by a document that was presented, namely the marriage certificate which was filed and marked as exhibit No. 1. A photograph taken two and a half years ago is presented as exhibit No. 2. This is a likeness of the husband of the petitioner. Mr. Jacobs, an advocate from Montreal I believe, appeared as counsel for the petitioner and began his questioning as follows:

By Mr. Jacobs:

Q. Mrs. Ribkoff, where was your husband born?

A. In Montreal.

Q. Where has he resided during his life time?

A. In Montreal.

Q. During your marriage with him what city did you live in?

A. In Montreal.

But they did get married in the United States. The questioning continues:

Q. To your knowledge where is your husband living today?

A. In Montreal.

Q. Did you have any children with your husband?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. How many?

A. Two.

Q. What are their names and how old are they?

A. Arlene Adele is 5, born October 18, 1954; and Stephen Warren, 3, bom August 24, 1956.

It may be interesting, Mr. Chairman, to go back and check with the marriage certificate because there is some doubt whether they got married in 1953 or 1954. At any rate the questioning continues as follows:

Q. During your marriage with your husband could you tell us how you got along with him?

A. Not very well.

Q. What trouble did you have?

A. He beat me, he insulted me, he was abusive, spoke harshly, came home late.

Q. How late would he come home?

A. Three and four a.m.

Q. How often?

A. Almost every night.

Q. Did you speak to him about his conduct?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. What was his reply?

A. He said that it was none of my business.

Q. As a result of the facts you have stated did anything happen to you in April 1957?

A. Yes, I became ill.

Q. What type of illness did you contract?

A. Tuberculosis.

Q. As a result of that illness did you spend any time in the sanitarium?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. How long were you there?

A. Ten and a half months.

Q. During this period of time who looked after the children?

A. My mother did.

Q. Do you remember your husband coming to see you in the sanitarium in January 1958?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Did you have any discussion with him?

A. 1 did.

Q. What did he tell you at that time?

A. I told him I was to be discharged the following month and that we would require a home in Montreal, and he says as far as he is concerned it is my problem not his because he has no intention of setting up home for me like that.

Q. Were you discharged the following month?

A. Yes, I was.

Q. February 1958?

A. Yes.

Q. Where did you have to go?

A. To my mother's.

Q. Since that time has he ever set up a home for you?

A. No, he has not.

Q. Did you do your own part, did you make any attempt to try to bring the family together?

A. Yes, I did, because my mother's house was too small and I felt I wanted to take an apartment with my husband and try to make a go of our marriage.

Q. Did that ever work out?

A. No, he refused.

If we go back to the real reason, Mr. Chairman, why this marriage did not succeed or why the parties did not get along, what do we find? I have not been able to find out how old the husband is. She was 19 years old when she got married. I am not sure how old the husband was. I am not really sure why Mr. Jacobs changed the date on the marriage certificate. But if the new date was correct instead of the old one, the petitioner got off to a bad start in the first place because of the situation existing and probably there was a terrific amount of resentment involved in this marriage. What we are about to find out as to the grounds for the adultery charge in this case is not necessarily important to the case at all but it has incidentally arisen out of the fact that the husband resented the marriage in the first place and

Private Bills-Divorce

that the arrangements did not work out. The second child followed the first. The stay in the sanitarium did not help the situation at all so that by the time she was ready to leave the sanitarium the husband had decided that he had no intention and certainly no desire to set up a house for his wife. Senator Roebuck continues with the questioning and he is interested in ascertaining whether any arrangements had been made for financial support, particularly in view of the fact that the husband has already indicated that he has no intention of renting an apartment.

By the Chairman (Senator Roebuck):

Q. Did he give you any money for the support of yourself and the children?

A. Yes.

Q. How much?

A. Not very much.

By Mr. Jacobs:

Q. How much weekly, actually?

A. $20 a week.

Q. As a matter of fact, by court order is he now contributing $25 a week for the support of you and the children?

A. Yes.

Q. And you have sufficiently regained your health and I understand you are engaged as a bookkeeper?

A. That is right.

Q. And the children live with you?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you have anyone looking after them while you work?

A. Yes, I have an efficient housekeeper.

By Senator Lambert:

Q. Do these payments come in regularly?

A. Yes.

By Mr. Jacobs:

Q. Do you have any personal knowledge of your husband's alleged adultery on March 3, 1959 at the Croyden apartment hotel in Montreal?

A. I was informed by the detectives.

Q. But you were not present at the time?

A. No.

Q. Is there any collusion or arrangement between you and your husband to obtain this divorce?

A. No.

Q. Have you in any way connived with anyone to bring this petition before the committee today?

A. No.

Q. Has there been any condonement or forgiveness on your part?

A. No.

Q. Would you take him back today?

A. No.

Mr. Chairman, these questions must be asked but it would seem to me that we are only asking people to lie and to perjure themselves for no particular good reason. We are all aware, I am sure, on reading this evidence that the wife is not paying for this petition, that she has no money.

Mr. Jacobs:

At the next sitting of the house.

Mr. JACOBS:

, 1'Why is the annuity branch administered by the Department of Labour?

2. What is the present premium rate on government annuities?

3. Is the present rate based wholly on the mortality table or was the interest rate a guiding factor as well?

4. Did the minister obtain from the Superintendent of insurance or any fellow of the institute of actuaries an opinion as to the adequacy of the present rate on government annuities?

5. Is there a yearly deficit on annuities already sold?

6. If the annuities branch has been operated 1!L Uie past at a deficit, will the present rates offset that deficit?

7. Are Canadian government annuities held by citizens of other countries who are not livin'' in Canada?

8. What is the maximum amount of benefit under a single annuity? Of the total number of annuities sold in the past three years what percentage of that number was for the maximum amount?

9. Is a record kept of the class of person who buys government annuities?

10. Can a purchaser of a government annuity pay only a small amount such as $10, and then alter a length of years, by paying all the premiums before retiring age, receive his annuity?

1L Are the expenses, and deficits, if any, of the annuities branch met out of the consolidated revenue ibnd ? If so, what amounts were paid m 193a, 1936 and 1937: (a) for expenses; (b) for deficits?

12. Does the government borrow the funds ol the annuities branch? If so, at what rate ol interest?

. * Afe ike funds of the annuities branch

invested in securities? If so, what is the nature ol these securities?

14. Are agents appointed by the government to sell annuities? If so, how are such agents paid? If by commission, at what rate? What would the annual payment to each of these agents amount to?

Mr. JACOBS:

The statutes will be published.

Mr. JACOBS:

It is a case of evil communications corrupting good manners.