VAGARIES OF THE LAW

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11663, 30 October 1923, Page 5

VAGARIES OF THE LAW

WRONG MAN SUFFERS

EXTRAORDINARY MAINTENANCE CASE IN COURT.

NOT FATHER, BUT RESPONSIBLE

A curious caso wherein the father of an illoiritinuue child completely escaped liahilit v as to payment of maintenance, and whose nsnomsibility was, by the ruling ot the law, placed upon the shouldered of another, came under the notice of Mr K. Page. S.M., at tha Magistrate’s Court yesterday.

liie defendant, a young man employed as a conductor in tfig corporation tramways, and represented by Mr F. Haigh. was prosecuted fur maintenance of his wife's child. The defendant was not the father of the child, explained Sub-In«.pe:-tor Cummings, but had married the mother, who had since died, and who was practically dying on her leet when the defendant married her. Jte was, therefore, liable to pay maintenance for tile child, although if :he real father could l>e found liability vould lie removed.

Mr Haiiih. observing that the charge was apparently laid under section 36 ;d> of the Destitute Persona Act, admitted that his client was. as the liable to support the chip Counsel, however, urged that, action be immediately taken to procure the real father of the child, and make him shoulder his responsibility. At the time of Ilia marriage" the defendant did mu even knew of the existence of the child.

Tiie sub-inspector intimated that the real father of the ohil<J had beqii found, but the difficulty was to prove the fact of his responsibility because the wife was not living to give evidence. "If vou can find the real father,” concluded the magistrate, ‘‘you may obtain an order against him anti have the one against the defendant cancelled. The real father is the man who ought to be made to pav. t,fl it is hardly fair on the defendant.” All order was made for 10s payment tt> be made weekly by the defendant.