SWEET EIGHTEEN LAUGHS AT THE LAW

NZ Truth, Issue 1190, 20 September 1928, Page 5

SWEET EIGHTEEN LAUGHS AT THE LAW

NO, it was not' a grave crime that brought these two obviously happy lovers before the Wellington Magistrate's Court. ■ They were jointly' charged with making a false declaration to the registrar of births, deaths and marriages, m that, for the purposes of getting married, they had stated that the girf's age was 21, whereas she was but 18, and sweet eighteen, at that. _J m Through their counsel, Lawyer W. E3. Leicester, a plea of not guilty was entered, and through his able presentation of the f aots to the court, this plea was ■. sustained. Magistrate Page dismissed the information, suppressed the names of the happy couple and let them go their happy way. According to the little wife, she had not enjoyed a happy home life, and sought the marital content with the man she loved. She admitted telling her young husband that she was 21, but he had made out the declaration believing it to be true, to the best of his knowledge and belief. She had riot signed a declaration, m any sense of the word — only the marriage register. The evidence of the mother, who was termed, by Magistrate Page as hos-

In Satiny Nelson

tile, occasionally caused merriment within the august walls. This cheerful lady, when m the witness-box, was asked by Chiefdetective Ward, if she were the mother of the female accused (spare the term on such a dainty creature)., Rather tartly came the reply: Yes I am — worse luck! Mother said she had lived m Nelson where the male defendant visited them m December last. • He obtained permission for her daughter to visit his people m Wellington, the girl arriving some time m January. But she did not go hack to. Nelson. Witness later found out, after coming to Wellington, that the girl had been married. Witness did not give her consent. Her daughter was only 18 on February 23 last. Her young husband knew perfectly well that she was not 21, she said. He must have learned from their general conversation that she was only 18. Apart from this, on her daughter's 18th birthday, she had sent over a present addressed care of the male defendant's home. . Lawyer Leicester: When was your daughter's 18th birthday ?^-It was on February 23. From whom did the present come?— Myself. Who was it addressed to? — To Miss , care of > Can you say, of your own knowledge if received it? — No. ' go you know of any definite conver- J

WHEN A MAID MARRIES

An Age-limit Worry and A Hitch Happily Overcome

(From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Wellington Representative.) A dainty little wisp of a thing, she waited expectantly until the magistrate had given his decision; then smiled Joyously, coyly nestled against her young husband's arm while he shook hands with his solicitor. Then, linking arms with the man with whom, she had so recently joined fortunes, she strolled happily into the sunshine outside the court. ~ : .o ■ L -•

Did you tell her you were divorced from him? — No. You came to Wellington m April?— Yes. Was It your intention that your daughter should come and live with you and Skjellerup ?— Certainly. When you came to Wellington, you got a room next St. Peter's Church?— Tea. . . Was she to sleep m the same room as you and Skjellerup?— The girl was not there. ' - Did you not tell us she was to live with you? — Yes, when I opened house. Counsel: Oh, when you took a house. Skjellerup is m prison at the present time, isn't he? demanded counsel. "So you say," came the tart reply. You found: out your daughter was married some time last month did you not? — About three weeks ago. You went to thepolice? — After I had been to my -daughter who. denied being married. Then I went to the registrar and then to the police. Up to that time you had made no objection against— — character? — No. You know 'she \s living with, her husband at his mother's place? — Yea.

Hostile Mother ?

You knew at that time that — — -was a civil servant and had been for some years?— Yes. Evidence was. given by the registrar concerning the declaration signed by the young man. i . Detective Baylisa told the court he had called on the girl who informed him that her husband had seen her solicitor and recommended him to call there. •■';, -... ■ • ... In the subsequent statements prepared by Lawyer Leicester, the girl said she knowingly mis-stated her age as she ■was unhappy at home and wanted to get married. The error m her father's and her mother's names she made quite Innocently. The young fellow stated that he made the declaration, to the best of his knowledge arid belief, thinking it to be true. Lawyer Leicester contended there was no case to answer. , The only witness who said the young man was assured of the girl's correct age. was the mother. Her statements were vague. She was obviously hostile because the girl had married without her consent. If she were. not sorry for the action which she had caused to be instituted, she ought to be. . Magistrate Page said the mother was apparently hostile and angered at them for marrying without telling ; her. The evidence against the male defendant was not [strong ertough and with it the charge againat the girl must fail.

sation when you told — — the girl's age? — Yes. Where did the conversation take place? — In Nelson. Who lived m the house, then?— My daughter. Yes, and who else? A Mr. Skjellerup? —Yes. ' ■.''■;.■ Anyone else?— Yes, a little boy. /Who was he, your son? — He was adopted. Was he an illegitimate ohild? — Not that I know of. Come, you're a nurse, aren't you? Was he legitimate or illegitimate? And counsel handed witness a birth certificate on whioh her name was mentioned. ' x

Well, was he illegitimate?— lf that's what you call it, I suppose, he was. Counsel (scornfully) : Of course he was. You and Skjellerup were occupying the same room, were you not? — Yes. Did not your eldest son say the surroundings were no place for the girl? —No. ••■■■• . ''- ... ■ • ' . Did he not say it was improper, her staying- there while you were living with Skjellerup?— No. .* Do you deny the reason was beoause the girl objected to remain m the household?— That is not so. Where was your second husband?— He was not there; we were separated. Did you tella Mrs. ■ that he waa m a mental asylum?— No.