PARENTAL RIGHTS.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXXX, Issue 12963, 23 January 1913, Page 3

PARENTAL RIGHTS.

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR'S LATEST. (Per Preae Association.) AUCKLAND, last night. The father of a lad charged with failing to render personal service under the Defence Act appeared in the Police Court, this morning before Mr E. C. Cutten, S.M., and raised the contention that the provisions of the Act constituted an invasion of parental rights. When a lad named E. T. Drumm was charged, he pleaded "not guilty," stating that in failing to serve he acted under his father's instructions. The father thereupon -rose at the solicitor's table and stated that the military authorities with whom he had had correspondence were aware that the lad was not to blame and that he (the father) had prevented the lad from rendering service. Mr Cutten : That does not save the boy from prosecution under the Act. It only makes you liable under another section. The father : Why was not notice sent to the boy? The Magistrate : That has nothing to do with the case. The boy has to render service or to apply for and obtain a certificate of exemption, or be convicted of failing to render service. The father : So long as it is made clear that the boy is being punished for* obeying his father, that is all I want. The Magistrate : He is being punished for' not rendering service. If you are preventing him you will be punished too Mr Cutten advised the fatheV that if he ; . had conscientious objections he could apply to the Magistrate under the Act for exemption for the lad from military duties, and if the Magistrate •was satisfied that the objections were made in good faith, the boy would be asked to carry out the prescribed duties under the Act. If he did not then carty out those duties he could be prosecuted for not rendering service. The father : I have correspondence with military officers that will pake the j case clear. Mr Cutten : Correspondence ' with military officers will be no good. They have nothing to do with the law. Continuing, the Magistrate stated that the present information was faulty, and he would strike it out and order a fresh information to be laid. In the meantime exemption could be properly applied for. He had only to administer the law as it was, and the applicant would have to go to some other person if he wished to make remarks about what the law ought to be. Mr Drumm said he did not intend to avail himself of the conscientious objector's clause. His contention was that the Act was subversive of parental authority. •