RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XV, Issue 857, 26 January 1861, Page 4

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Chbistchubch—Thubsday, Januaby 17. ; [Before W. J. W. Hamilton, Esq., R.M.] MAKINO A FALSE DECLAEATION. It appeared from the evidence of Dr. Barker, Registrar for Births, Deaths, and Marriages for the district of Christchurch, that Thomas Griffith Rowley had come to his office about the 22nd Dec. last year, and expressed a desire to be married privately, which he was informed could not l»e. He came subsequently to the office on the 24th Dec. and filled up a notice of marriage required by the act, and in it stated his. age to be 22 years, and declared the contents of the notice to be true. He was married by Dr. Barker on the same day, viz. the 24th December, in the presence of two witnesses. Sometime afterwards, prisoner's mother called on the Registrar to ask if her son had been married. Being answered in the affirmative she expressed her disappointment. Dr. Barker then said he had given his age as 22, upon_w}ii<jh._she. laughed and said " he is not near one and twenty." Dr. Barker then told her he must represent the case to the authorities.

Mary Rowley was next called, and stated that the accused, who was her son, was born on the 2nd day of November, 1840, so that he would now be in his 21st year, but that she had no record by which she could prove his age. She then went on to describe her.interview with Dr. Barker thus : —" I asked if it was true that my two sons were married. He said " No; the eldest was not married." He then said " Do you mean the one under age?" I : said. " yes, sir ;;_ XJ^lftsJbj^JA.n3flrxiftlL-l_ HsMkgcL "Tnirth"en"wh™at his age was. I told him I did not exactly know, but I did not think he was 21. Dr. Barker said "I ask you, because I did not think he was that age when I married him. He then said "I shall take notice of what you say." "He gave his age to me as 22." I then said, "please not to say anything about it, as I have come on the quiet unknown to anyone." He replied, '• I will prosecute your son for giving me a false age." I asked him not to do so as I was not confident what his age was. I then left."

In answer to a question by the Resident Magistrate, she stated that she did not recollect ever telling prisoner his age or what year he was born.

Joseph Rowley, the father of the prisoner, was next called. He corroborated last witness's statement in every particular, and gave his evidence in a most straightforward manner, as did also his wife. They both stated that if prisoner had asked their consent to his marriage, they would both have consented.

Mr. Slater, who appeared for the prisoner, shortly addressed the Bench. He commented very strongly on Dr. Barker's rushing into a prosecution of the prisoner without making due enquiries. He thought the intention of the Marriage Act was not to throw hindrances in the way of young people marrying, but to prevent unprincipled persons from marrying girls with property without the proper consent. It was quite possible for prisoner to make the mistake he did; never having been told his age by either of his parents, and he contended that there was no evidence to show a wilful misrepresentation. He would therefore ask the Bench for a discharge for the prisoner.

The Resident Magistrate stated that although he did not concur with Mr. Slater in thinking that Dr. Barker was to blame for bringing this case forward yet he did not think there was any evidence to go to a jury. He would therefore give the prisoner a severe caution and discharge him.—Discharged accordingly.