MOTHERS' RIGHTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18703, 8 May 1924, Page 5

MOTHERS' RIGHTS.

• 1 1 1 CUSTODY OF CHILDREN. ; EB£ILJE ; ; POLINFS CASE.. ' * "v■ " The laws of New South Wales, 30 fa?: /- • , as they relate to the custody of children, , i are not harsh, ! and they give the Judges ■ ' full discretion to decide who : shall ; have • 5 ' the ( custody of children brought within . the jurisdiction of the ; Court," said /.Mr. - [ Ley, Minister' for Justice, in replying to a deputation organised by the * Feminist / * Club of New South Wales, last week.. . ' The v deputation represented ' i various -i I women's organisations, and: asked > that inxr, * ) consequence of the resent Court decision' % i in the Emijie Polini. case the / law should - [ be . altered so as to provide for: " (X) ••••. That :in the case of children of.. tender *• years the mother should be regarded as; " the natural guardian unless ; the Court/, -i found.:against her . such immorality .as: made • her care ■:& danger; to : the children; /" • c and (2) that in those cases where the . • mother ; had to earn her living, and iu •v- ---' order to do so * had a\ bona-fide reason to / travel outside the ; State ;■ the ; fact of . her 1 J having to do so should not operate to rob her of »' the right to her child. «' : Miss Preston ; Stanley said /;' that, there was a petition already signed by over 15,000 men and women ' asking; for T the s •I alteration of the, law in this' respect. J" 1 They > pleaded : that!the ■ married mothers | of the State should have equal.right 1 with : . 1 their . husbands .in • the custody of their ! children. o The Court- in the recent :/ case / I had held thai - morallyi and economically • ■ 1 < EnitiHe'Polin:* was ■as equally entitled to ' i thej custody of the child! as her ; husband, v yet ,the , Court decided 'that' the ?. person v , \ who would- really have • control », of .: the ' 1 ; child would be the : mother of the ; father. : \ The women who ' Were represented by . ' that deputation 'wanted the law altered .;/.. I to. make such decisions ' impossible : ini the • ! . future, , 5;., . . w w *: Mr.' Ley said thati in ;tli« case /quoted // ; : the 1 Judge ; had an absolute '/ discretionary /■ y - ■■ ;power say , which parent should have-./ ■, • : control . of the child, and the Judge : on' . * r the evidence before him decided that it ' . was best for the child . that it should , be given into the custody of the. father. It •; was v not ; the ' practice in. English-speaking, . ' countries to bring in legislation;specially/" 1 for. the - purpose of / upsetting a decision "; *- | V of a : Judge, "as was now; requested, when he was . asked 'to/make the ? legislation , i retrospective to., deal, with this particular [ case. . ; There was a law in British Col-, * umbia giving the mother equal right with ■ .... the father to the custody of the child- • , ; ran, ■ but i that law did - not ■ carry them . i much further than the law :of New Sflttth ■ I Wales, as "it merely put on the Statute . , ■ Book' a principle already recognised m . - ,|- New -South ; Wales. / However, : if there ,•• •• was a general request to have :that em- , • bodied in the law of New South Wales -. ,; he slid * not ; see any • objection /to f doing - . so but there would have Jtoo be - other/ grounds besides that of thfi immorality of ■ : the mother taken into /consideration. .■>