A FATHER'S INTENTIONS.

Auckland Star, Volume XLIV, Issue 91, 17 April 1913, Page 8

A FATHER'S INTENTIONS.

APPLICATION DISMISSED. <By Telegraph.—Own Correspondent.) WHANGAREI, Wednesday. John F. Hansen appeared before -Mr. ■ , ?, zcr ' at the Court °n Tuesday, charged that, being a person against vvhom an order had been made forinaintenance of five children, he was about to leave the Dominion without finding sureties for the same. Mr. T. H. Stead"man appeared for defendant. After mention had been made of the fact that defendant was at a recent date engaged ineourt proceedings in regard to the children, who are now in an industrial school, Sergeant Moore said it was evident that defendant was about to leave the place. Constable Armstrong said defendant had his farm for sale. Witness was on the farm .when a man came to buy it, and defendant said he was going to leave the Dominion. Mr. Steadman (to witness): Didn't you get a wigging over this case from Judge JEdwards? Witness: Not altogether. Mr. Frazer said that ho knew the cir-cii-nstances of the case in regard to the Supreme Court proceedings. • Mr. Steadman: Defendant can take his children any time. They -were wrongly committed. The Magistrate: No, he cannot; they ■were committed on my order, and that will have to stand until it is set aside. Mr. Steadman: The- whole case broke down. It was a conspiracy. The judge stopped the case before it was through. Mr. Frazer said that, as far as the commitment of the children to the industrial home went, they had to be scut somewhere, if only from a humanitarian; point of view. 'The position is this,': continued his Worship, "the order is valid until it is set aside." Sergeant Moore said they got their instructions from the Minister of Edu-j cation in Wellington. Mr. Steadman': It was on a, report from here. I think you will find that it came from Hikurangi. His Worship pointed out that he could make an order as applied for under the Destitute Persons Act, hut he did not think that he could make an order under the Industrial School Act. Defendant was continually interrupting proceedings at this stage, and received in consequence a reprimand from the magistrate. Mr. Steadman .pointed out the great cost of the . present and previous proceedings had put defendant to. He appealed for costs against the JDepartment. His -Worship said that there would have to be special circumstances before he. could give costs against the Department. The case was dismissed..