BLOWS IN COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 17 December 1928, Page 7

BLOWS IN COURT

LiV’KP-POOL, October 21

Ijlfiws wore exchanged in the corridors of Liverpool Police Court and in Dale-stret, outside the court, to-day followng a 'decision concerning the ■ u-.Ltaly of- a child. Umbrellas were hrandished and womcn's screams could he heard all over the court. The mother and the chic clung to one another and wept loudly. The ease concerned an application hy sir Henry Xuttall. a director of a Manchester shipping company living al New Mills. Derbyshire. I’or the custody oi his son. George Henry Xuttall, aged

The slipondary maglslrale, Mr .Stuart: Deacon, decide-*! to grant the custody of i he hoy until lie was sixteen to his lather, hut gave the mother who was now living in Xorwyn-street. Cluhmoor, the right of access to the eliihl each Saturday and Sunday between noon and 8 p.m. Mr Deacon a'.so ordered that the boy might reside with his mother during the first half of his holidays.

I-'Olt WHLFAPK OK CHILD

He said that the parties were married in Xovendier 15)21 and that the boy was born in August 1922. Soon after th<“ birth Mrs Xuttall left her husband and took the child with her. She returned to her husband in 19? o. but again left him in 192(5. She made no application to the courts asking for Ihe legal custody of the child. The husband had an income of something over £noo a year and Mrs Xuttall was earning -ins a week as a waitress. ‘•The boy is now approaching the time when it. seems to me he should have the advantages of a father’s influence and care.” continued Mr Deacon. “it is quite true the father did send t > hi.s wife postcards of a very disgraceful character because, in Ins own foolish v.ay. he though it might bring matters to a head. Put 1 have come to the conclusion that there is no ground for the suggestion that the father is not the nronor person to have tin' custody of the child, and as lie is in an infinitely hotter position to provide for the welfare of the child than the nvther it is for the welfare of the child that this order should l.e made.

WTFF.’S DKXI.tT.S

In ber evidence Mrs Xuttall denied that the night before her wedding she spent 3J hours with a lover. Her lms-

hand, she said, was not (it to have the .custody of any child. He wanted the child hccan.se he knew it was the only way he could strike at her. She denied that she coached the hoy not to speak to his father when they met and not to play with a toy which he bought.