THE LAST LEGAL SNIP

NZ Truth, Issue 1174, 31 May 1928, Page 9

THE LAST LEGAL SNIP

A Mother's Love

Divorce Scissors Sever Boltons' Matrimonial Bonds (From "N.Z. Truth's" Palmerston North Representative.) The last clip of the decree absolute severing scissors has been applied to the matrimonial knots of Felix and Eileen Bolton.

WIELDING this legal tool at the Palmerston North Supreme Court last week, Mr. Justice Ostler, m favoring the husband's petition, said that although Mrs. Bolton gave way to temptation, she still remained the children's mother and bore towards them a mother's love. She was now living a reputable life and it would be depriving the children of a priceless influence m their lives to cut them off from any intercourse with their mother. The judge, therefore, granted conditional access. ( Thus the curtain was rung down when the wife, through her counsel, sought to secure custody of the two small girls of the union. The learned judge, however, was not prepared to depart from the established rule that the guilty party should be deprived of that privilege, but nevertheless, took advantage of the presentday tendency to consider the interests of the children as of paramount importance, and to give her reasonable access to them. Felix Bolton was ordered to pay his wife maintenance until such i-^-o as ' she could earn her own living. Prima, facie, said his honor, the petitioner had a right to the children, but their welfare was the paramount consideration. Since they were deserted by Mrs. Bolton and left m her husband's custody, there was nothing to show that they had not been well cared for. Petitioner had ample means to provide for them and female relatives who could take charge of them. They were at present at a girl's collegiate school, and were being properly cared for and educated there.

There was nothing m the affidavits to show that they would be better cared for if the custody was given to

against the petitioner or against any of his relatives, to have access to the children for two hours on every Saturday afternoon during 'their school terms and that she be entitled, on the same condition, to take them out and have them m her sole charge during such periods of access. "The order will be until further order of the court and it will depend on circumstances whether the order is varied so as to give more or less liberal access. "If the conduct of Mrs. Bolton warrants it and it is found to the advantage of the children to spend part of their holidays with their mother, such an order may be made hereafter. Liberty will be reserved to both parties to apply to vary or rescind the order." Speaking on the matter of maintenance, his honor observed that Mrs. Bolton had no occupational training, but she could not expect, to be kept m idleness for the rest of her, life. She must start and learn how to earn her own living. However, as the jury had found that she was not entirely to blame for what had occurred — that petitioner had been careless and neglectful towards her — then the husband ought to contribute something towards her maintenance meanwhile. This he fixed at 30/- per week, so long as respondent remained unmarried. Leave was granted Bolton to move at any time to discharge or vary the order upon proof that Mrs. Bolton had become possessed of wealth or. could earn sufficient to support herself. In pleading Mrs. Bolton's case, Lawyer Treadwell had something more to

respondent. Petitioner was entitled to have the decree absolute and his honor added that he was prepared to make an order giving him permanent custody of the two girls. With regard to access, the law had altered m recent years. There was a rigid rule until 1891 that deprived the guilty wife of all access to her children. From then until 1910 the courts adopted- the practice which one judge had summed up m the following words: "I do not say that the court can In no case give to an adultress access to her children; there might be circumstances m which it would think fit to do so, but they must be vfery exceptional circumstances.". A further step was taken m 1910 when the Court of Appeal laid down the law thus: — "We only desire to add that the matrimonial offence which justified the divorce ought not to be regarded for all time and under all circumstances as sufficient to disentitle the mother to access to her daughter. "The Court ought not to lay down a hard and fast rule on this subject. 1 The power conferred on the Court ought to be exercised discretionally according •to the particular circumstances m each case and it is always to be borne m mind that the benefits and interests of the child are the paramount consideration and not the punishment of the guilty spouse. "The fact that liberty ot access may affect the mind of the child is only a circumstance to be considered and ought not to be regarded as a comi plete bar to any charge or new order for access." Accordingly, his honor made an order that the respondent should be entitled, on condition that she x-igidly ab--1 stained from using any endeavor to mii fluence the minds of the children

It showed, he thought, that Bolton felt very bitterly towards respondent and was prepared to resort to statements that he could not rely upon. The man was unfitted to look after two young girls and his conduct since the trial showed that he did not understand the needs of young children. He had refused to let the mother see them at Christmas time, when to have granted her wish would have gladdened the hearts of the children. Bolton, he thought, possessed an unreasonable type of mind; his disposition was hard and unbending. There was also the statement that he had taken the two girls to see poultry and animals slaughtered and had sent the little girl of five to bring m the cows. Perhaps he was, trying to make boys of his girls. Petitioner's counsel reminded the court that Mrs. Bolton's conduct m Pahiatua had been such as to make it "the talk of the town," while her conduct with other men had brought a reprimand even from the co-respondent, who urged her to give up drinking and "spotting." Counsel held that Mrs. Bolton had once deserted her children and had gone to Wellington, sending back a letter m which she stated that she supposed the girls would soon forget her. But when co-respondent did not follow, she went back to claim them again. Since the case had bQen decided against her, she had written to her husband stating that if he had not been so mean, she would have given him certain information that would have secured his divorce without any trouble. His Honor: "By that, you suggest that her evidence of connivance was false?" Counsel: "That is so, your honor."

say of the attitude adopted by petitioner towards hi 3 wife. He had laid charges, said counsel, that he could