A BABY'S DEATH.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVII, Issue 263, 10 November 1906, Page 5

A BABY'S DEATH.

FATTTKR'S BRUTAL TREATMENTBEST TO PRISON FOR SIS MONTHS. William Fj Clausen, a labourer, of Otahmiu, was pui, upou his trial at the Oumuau i'oUco buuiß this morning, okaigcd witu tlie ■'luajislaugiiter , ' of hi* nuuiiu child, wao died on ucuJDer 27 th. 'ibe case was heai'd beioit iHr. Dyer, S.M. Constable foreman conducted tne prosecution, but the accused was aot represented by counsel Tne charge was that the accused eauaed the deaui of hia enud, Konaid jt\aiiK. Clausen, under the age ol three lnontus, by using pnysieal violence upon it. Cousuble Foieman. opening the case, said the cuild appeared to have disturbed the father at night, and on those occasions the father Look the child up, shook it, ajid on one occasion slapped it across the back, causing a black bruise to arise. One night he ordered his wife out of bed because the baby was crying, and as she would not go, he carried the child out of tha room, laid it down in the kitchen and forced th? wife out by assauliing her and blackening her eye. Even after the child was d-'ad he r:fused to attend the funeral because he had to go to work, thus showing a callousness about the child from b ginning to end. Whether or not the evidence would bear out his opening statement would be a matter for his Worship's decision. Dr. Rowley, of Otahuhu, said that on Saturday, October 27th, he saw the body of the infant after death, and found it in a V3ry dirty uncared-for co diiion The night-dress was more or Iss wet, and the napkin was saturated and contained unhealthy, offensive matter, and traces of blood. Tb.2 body w.'s that of a poorly-nourished, unhealthy child. At the bottom of the back was a bruise where the skin had been broken, but bad since hialed. The witness described a stato of rawness caused by chafing of wet njpkins and a number of bruises about the thighs, from several of which blood was oozing. He made a post-mortom examination of the body, and fou"d no int'rnal evidence of injury. He believed the cause of death was convulsions due to an enormously dilated stomach in a weak unhealthy cliild. His Worship: Do you think the violence indicated by the externa] bruises had any effpet in causing death? Witness: Tt would cause a certain amount of shock, and reduce the child's vitality and power of resisting disease, and so hasten the death. His Worship: Do you think it was a direct cause of death? Witness: No, not directly. Hia Worship: If, instead of ill usage, the child had received kind treatment, would its life have been saved? Witness: I think if it had received proper treatment its life would have been prolonged, and it possibly would have recovered. Thie concluded the dorter's evidence. His Worship expressed n'n opinion that the doctors evidence was insufficient to sustain a charge of manslaughter, and it would therefore be his duty to dismiss the ehanre. It was, however, open for the police to amend the charge to one of assault, on which he could hear further evidence. The information was amended accord ingly, and accused was charged with having committed a common assault upon the child nbont October 21st, by slapping it on the back and shaking it. Accused plendcd guilty, nnd, in reply to his Worship admitted that the cow stable* opening statement was true. His Worship, in passing sentence, said to the prisoner: "Yon are a very lucky man to escape the mnior chorgp. Of I course, we must tro on the pvi.lence as Iwe have received it. But had the rn^di I cal man's evidence been to the effect that your behaviour to the child was the cause if its death. I should have committed you for trial for manslauehtor in the* Supreme Court, and you would then hnve pot. no d-oubt, n very BPVere sentence, so that to that extent you arp fortunate. 1 think that a mm like you, you know, is a preat brute. A man who will shake and slap a little infant three months old is unworthy of I the name of man. Your conduct was simply Viitnl. and T cannot condemn it too severely. Fancy slapping and ebakmx an infant child, and your own child too! T shall <Hve you. for an aggravated assault—for T shall treat it as.an ag- | (rravated nssault—the full penalty that the law allows mc to jrive you. Tf it allowed mc to pve yon more T should •rive you more, but T cannot exceed the powers conferred on mc by statute. I convict yon on your own confession, and ! 1 sentence you to six months' impri segment with hard labour. The prisoner was led away. A womnn then approached the bench. all d nsked to be allowed to make a st'+TPf-nt. TTin Worship: You are not charged. I Who are you? The woman: T am his wi f e. His Worship: Won. what l" it? The wife: I would like to ?iy that the ! report* in the paperr and what the. doci tor said would reflect a certain amount. of blame on tne. T would like to say in my defence that T had another child just a year and a-hnif old. and I bad a laundry" as well. If it bad not been that I had 'other work to do I would never hnve neglected the child as long aa I Hμ? Worship: You think there is a reflection of some kind cast upon you for your treatment of the child, and you want to clear yourself? The wife: Yes. His Worship: Very welL I daresay what you say will be taken notice of.