CUSTODY OF CHILD

Greymouth Evening Star, 21 July 1944, Page 6

CUSTODY OF CHILD

RELIGIOUS TRAINING ISSUE. CHRISTCHURCH, July 21. . “Permanent custody of the chila will be given to the mother and there will be no order at all giving the father, the respondent, any. right of access,” said Mr. Justice Northcroft giving judgment in the Supreme Court, this morning, in a motion to have a decree nisi made absolute. The motion was granted. When the motion first came before His Honor, the husband, while agreeing to the custody of the ten-year-old girl -with the wife, asked that the Court give him access to the child so that she could be given special religious instruction in the Roman Catholic Faith. x , “Where the parents separate and custody is given to one of them, with access by the other, a condition of serious harm to the child can develop, unless each of the parents, although estranged, is essentially loyal to the other in relation to the child..” said His Honor. “If there be any hostility between the parents in which the child is • involved, or of which it becomes aware, or if there be substantial differences of opinion between the parents on some matter concerning the child, especially concerning its religious instruction, then the child must be placed in an unhappy position, damaging to its happiness and general well being.” Differences had arisen on the subject of the religious training of the child, said His Honor. The parties themselves had agreed that the mother should have custody, and access by father was incidental to that. •‘lt does not in my view carry with it a right on the part of the father to interfere with the religious upbringing of the child in opposition to the mother’s wishes, said His Honor. He added that the decision need not sever the association between father and daughter, if the father were prepared to accept the mother’s decisions upon the matter of the child’s religious training and observances. It was intended to mean, however, that his association with the child would be dependent upon the indulgence of the mother, and upon her being satisfied that he was not interfering in religious matters, so as to imperil the well being and happiness of the child.. There was no suggestion that the wife was irreligious, or would neglect the spiritual or moral up-bringing of her daughter. If it should happen that there was proper reason to complain of the conduct of the wife in the matter, respondent could make such application as might be appropriate. DIVORCE INTERVENTION CHRISTCHURCH, July 21. Claiming that she was the woman described as unknown in a petition for divorce on the grounds of adultery, Mai Emily Willers was granted leave to intervene in the cause and to be made a party to the suit, by Mr. Justice Northcroft in the Supreme Court. Application was made under the Matrimonial Causes Rules which have been in operation only since last. December. Petition for divorce was by Ethel May Ramsay against Foster Alexander Ramsay, labourer. In her affidavit Willers denied adultery, and said she was desirous of proving her innocence.