WOMEN JUSTICES.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 18 July 1924, Page 5

WOMEN JUSTICES.

40 YEAR AGE LIMIT. AMUSEMENT OVER AN AMENDMENT. (By Telegranh—Special to Star.) July 17. The House of Representatives has again sent to the Legislative Council an' amendment to the Justices of the Peace Act, by Mr T. Wilford, making it clear that women may be appointed justices. There was an amusing experience in committee when Mr Lysnar, who fought a minority battle, sought to limit appointments to women not less than 40 years of age. He moved an amendment on these lines.

A member: How are you to know? (Laughter.) Mr Lysnar: There are more ways of ascertaining her age than that of judging by appearance. Women are capable of producing birth certificates. (Laughter.) Ido not think the Bill is a wise measure, hut if the House thinks it necessary then it should include only those ladies who are of mature mind. I do not wish to reflect on the young ladies (laughter), but it would require a mature woman’s mind to deal, with the duties.

When Mr Young, Chairman of Committees, nut the question to the House Mr Lysnar’s voice was the onlv one heard in support of his amendment, and members laughed heartily when he protested and called for a division. After the doors had been locked and he had had time to reflect Upon the predicament into which he had nut the members of the House Mr Lysnar suggested: “Take it on the voices.” A hubbub arose as to whether a division was wanted or not.

Mr Rhodes (Thames) assured the chairman that no division was now wanted, but did not carry his point. Everybody laughed when it was learned that he had been selected as one of Mr Lysnar’s tellers.

The non-party attitude adopted towards the Bill was indicated in the selection of tellers, Messrs Lysnar and Rhodes being nominated for the “ayes” supporting the addition on the words and the Hon. D. Buddo and Mr Wright for the “noes.” Mr Lysnar secured more support for his amendment than was anticipated, for he had 18 .followers against 44 for the Bill as it stood. The amendment was accordingly lost. Mr Wilford explained that his Bill was a small instalment of the scheme he hoped to see carried out in New Zealand. He hoped to. see women 5 s courts established', at least in the four centres, by way of experiment, to which could be referred troubles that occurred m which women were concerned. There would also be appointed under the control of the Justice Department what was known in America* as the “city mother.” This woman, whose judgment was valued by the police and administrators of the law, investigated troubles °.Y?„ r wav ward children and marital difficulties. He had investigated these two branches of social reform in America finding them 'quite successful When they saw public positions held by women and America and their political. progress in England thev must admit that we were far‘behind in such matters. He feared that as the Minister of Justice, who controlled the appointments, had voted for the amendment there would he no chance of seeing women justices under 40 years of age.

Mr Lysnar declared that he would have no objection to the appointing of a city mother or women’s* courts but it was unreasonable to annoint women tor the technical and difficult work of administering justice. It would he no real honour for them.

Mr Fraser: But is it justice? Mr Lysnar suggested that the leader °1 the Liberal Party was prepared to sacnfice the women of the Tfominion for party propaganda purposes* Mr Willoid had been of an entirely different imnd m 1918, when, as Minister for Justice, he told a Dunedin deputation that he would not authorise women jurors because women’s prejudices were ot the heart rather than the mind (Laughter.)

Mr McCombs pointed out that New Zealand was lagging far behind in the matter. He honed the Hon. C. J. Parr would show, himself more enlightened than Ins predecessors; and, - with or without the Bill on the .statute hook, that lie would see that in imitation of what had been done in Britain women could he appointed justices. Mr Holland supported the Bill, and said he refused to agree that there was a wide intellectual difference between men and women. The latter were just as intellectually capable as the former. Air Wilford, renlving to Mr Lysnar’s criticism, admitted that he had ‘changed his opinions as a result of what he had observed in the course of two visits to America. The Bill was read a third time and passed.