BOTHER ABOUT A BABY.

NZ Truth, Issue 106, 29 June 1907, Page 5

BOTHER ABOUT A BABY.

A 'MIX-UP -AT MASTERTON.

Was Braggins Fond of Work ?

Sergeant Miller Says Net.

j ■. The unwarranted' infant still occasioas remarkable disturbance m the community. . An advertisement signed ''C.8.," containing the invitation, "Will some kind lady," etc., appeared m- the Wellington ."Post," and James Arthur Brajggins and his missus Violet, who reside at Kuripuni, Masterton, made application for the bothersome baby. This kid was three weeks old, and was said to have been born at Johnsonville, of unauthenticatpd fatherhood. The number of fathers floating round loose dm the commuuity f - who are doubtful of their 'paternal responsibilities is amazingly large. Mrs Braggins answered the advertisement m our unesteemed contemporary, and m response thereto a man, who said, ho was a friend of "C.8.," called on her. As a result, she went to Wellington, and the precious yelling bundle was handed over IN A MYSTERIOUS WAY on the. Thorndon railway station. Accompanying the gift were three £5 notes, and £1 to eov,er Violet's exes to Wellington-' The unknown woman said she did not want to be seen handj ing the youngster over, and the utmost secrecy was observed m the transaction. Usually offsprings of this description die from the> superlative- affection lavished on them, but Dr. Qowie, of Masterfcon, testifies that tlvo kid, when, he saw it suffering .from a cold, was" we'll cared for as far as could !be seen by the experienced medical optic However, the police entered, the case, through Sergeant Miller, a gentleman with a Inch forehead and an •absorbed express-ion. He proceeded against the couple under the Infants' ! Life Protection Act, an-d the Magistrate's Court at Masterton was later on filled With expressions of indignation on the part' of Mrs Braggins. Solicitor Robinson contended that the charge was not a case of baby -farming, as defendants were anxious to> replace their own child, lost under particularly sad circumstances. Moreover, Mrs Bragging had, spent no j less that £11 6/ m Wellington m the purchase of a go-cart and clothing' for the kid, and felt the prosecution very keenly.. Sergeant Miller explained that Brag-gins wasn't a thfirty man, and had not the reputation of being f«md of work.- Section 3 of the Act made it unlawful for any person, m consideration c • Any payment or reward, to receive or retain m his. care or charge any infant -for the purpose of mainfcainine: it anart from its parjehts for longer .Hun three days, i;nI less the person held a license or the home was registered. Counsel, who suffers from a gigantic load m the initials, H.C.L.R., contended that the Act was not intended to penalise working people from adopting children if they desired to take up some more OF THE WHITE MAN'S BURDEN, but Magistrate James believed this was a Case directly Contemplated by the Act. Further; lie fined Mrs. Braggins £1 and costs 7s, ttiit dismissed the charge against Brag-gins, who appears to have wandered into the case m a promiscuous fashion. The Beak ordered the child to lie committed to the Wellington Receiving Home, and instructed the police to. make dili- | gent inquiries to ascertain who the parents of the. atom are. The case appears to have aroused interest m Masterton ; also, rightly or wrongly, the police sergeant ia accused of being unnecessarily , harsh. The police have !to' -be harsh to somebody when they bring a case, but they have to make a case occasionally to justify their billets, and the harshness m such event is unjustifiably rough. At anyrate, the followin? letter appeared m the Wairarapa "Daily TiTes," which, by the way, is the only journal m New Zealand which has openly championed the cause of the pestilent Chow : — THE BRAGGINS CASE.

(To the Editor.) Sir,~l notice by the report m your paper of the proceedings a - gainst Mr. and Mrs. . J. A. Braggins that there is no mention made m Mr. Braggins' evidence that for the last nine months he has been m regular work, walking four miles to work and four miles home again after doing eight hours a day. It was mentioned m evidence that Braggins was not a thrifty man, and had not a reputation for ; . being fond of work. Now. sir, show me a man who is fond of work if he can get out of it.— I am, etc., : j JUSTICE. Kuripuni. 21st "June, 1907. That letter looks bad for Braggins, but the Masterton afternoon paper altered it to suit its own purpose, and left but the vital portion. The original letter said, "Sergeant Miller states Ihat Braffgins was not a thrifty man," also, the close of the letter was as follows : i "Now, sir, is any man, fond of work if he ,can get out of it ? Also, 1 mieht state, that Sergeant-' Miller wasn't very fond of work when tie joined 1h? Police Force, but of course he didn't think of it when he tried to RUIN BRAG-GINS' REPUTATION." That 'ending puts an entirely different construction on the letter, which, as published,- conveyed the impression that Braggins wanted to dodge work. Read m its entirety, it demonstrates that Braggins -is a hard-workiae; man, and that the Sergeant joined the Police Force to es-' cape hard graft. "Truth" exists for the purpose of making- truth known, and the truth is herein given.