CUSTODY OF A CHILD.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVI, Issue 53, 8 July 1913, Page 7

CUSTODY OF A CHILD.

AX INTERESTING JUDGMENT

[Per Press (Association.]

Wanganui, July 7

The reserved judgment of Mr -Justice Chapman was delivered to-day in a very interesting case, the first o' its kind in New Zealand, concerning the custody of a child, one Thelma Gilberd, aged 12i years. For th-‘ greater part of her life she has lived with her uncle, John Forbes, a jeweller. Her father is a soap-maker. Proceedings were on the part of Gillie rd to obtain custody of the chib by a rule nisi calling on Forbes tt show cause why a writ of habeas corpus should not issue. The judgment concluded: “It is the practice of tiie Court to’examine the infant, not with the object of eliciting its opinion, but to assist the judge in determining whether its inclinations are of a marked character. I examined Thelma, and found her to be intelligent and possessed of unmistakeable views and inclinations on the subject. The Court will not lightly set aside the father’s authority, and as a rule it refuses to do so where there has been no misconduct on his part, and ho has not abdicated his authority, but circumstances may be such that the Court finds itself obliged to say it will not, for the benefit 0f,,, the child, allow him to assort his parental right, and it will be for his benefit for bis child to lie in the care of some other person. That state of affairs has, in my opinion, arisen hero, and T find it to bo my duty to exercise overriding jurisdiction, fully recognised in ‘Queen versus Gyngall,’ as vested in this Court. That condition of affairs, has, in my judgment, so far arisen out of the prolonged acquiescence in fact of the father in a settled state of affairs, that I cannot by a mere order of the Court undo what has been done. The evidence and all the circumstances satisfy mo that the child would not be happy in her fathers home. The experiment of returning her there has been tried and failed, and I am further satisjfied that her health and well-being require me to leave her where she is. For these reasons I order that the rule be' discharged without costs. I prefer to give no reason beyond saying that my reason involves no reflection on any of the parties.”