AUCKLAND GIRL’S CASE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXXIV, Issue 4, 28 October 1924, Page 3

AUCKLAND GIRL’S CASE.

BISHOP CLEARY’S STATE-

MENTf

IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS

Per Press Association

AUCKLAND, Oct. 26,

A statement regardin'; tlie Martin ease lias been given to the Herald by Mr. Wesley Spragg, who, as a longestablished friend of the Martin family, was closely associated with the case from the beginning. The statement is as follows: “In view of the positive statement by Bishop Cleary that the immediate cause of the departure of Margaret Martin from home had no connection with any religions views held by her, and because the statement (1 am quite sure unintentionally) gives support to some dastardly rumours which reflect upon the mother, I think it my duty to give the girl’s own version of the facts. When the newspapers and the public began to make inquiries for information of her whereabouts Miss Martin addressed a letter to her mother, dated September 19, as follows;

‘Mv dear mother —Yon will understand why I left home so suddenly yesterday. 1 claim the right to follow my own conscience on religions matters, and 1 was no longer able to stay with you in view of the attitude you had adopted. For that reason, and entirely of my own will, I thought it better to go. I am staying with people who are kind, so I am well looked after. There is nothing to worry about-*—With love from Margaret.’

/ “A copy of a second letter of the same date, addressed to the inspector of police, repeats the reason given in the first letter. It reads:—

‘I wish to state that yesterday njorning I left home owing to tliq serious opposition which met my intention with regard to matters of religion. I am quite well, safe and happy. I left entirely of my own accord and, am equally free in staying away. Should I wish to return there would be absolutely nothing to prevent my doing so.’ ”

Mr. Spragg continues : “I think there is evidence that both these letters, especially the one to the police inspector, were carefully worded under counsel of her new friends. They were written in the fearly stages of the incident, before it would be realised that their writer’s action would be the cause of the present unhappy sectarian bitterness, and before it was seen there was need for carefidly worded explanations. That being so I think they may be considered conclusive.

“Without doubt the religious views, such as they were, of a girl of immature judgment, doubtless under very unwise arid exceedingly cruel counsel given in connection therewith, broke up the Martin home. Emphasis appears to be laid upon what is called-‘the immediate cause' of her departure, etc. There need be no mystery about this. Mrs. Martin had reason to believe that a woman, who was lurking in a suspicious manner about the backyard of her residence, and who ran away when she knew she was being observed, was there for the purpose of inducing her daughter to leave her home (an earlier incident had given reason for the belief), and so she placed the latter under some small restraint. To be quite explicit she was locked up for the night in a room with access to her mother to. keep her from contact with the woman outside. This was to prevent her from doing exactly what she did do immediately an opportunity occurred, that is;Tuh away to her Roman Catholic,.friends. “Since her, return hpme .Miss, Martin has told her mother that this locking up incident was ‘the immediate ‘■ cause’l of her running away from home. There is no occasion for either fpolish or wicked- surmise about the matter. 1 am sorry I am called upon to contradict Bishop Cleary or to take any public part in this incident, I greatly regret its occurrence in out Community, because of the cruelty which has been inflicted upon-an esteetned family aiid an especially admirable mother. ' I am alsd very sorry because of its influence in stirring up uncharitableness and needless antipathies and strife among neighbours who were intended ’to be friends.”