Father Blamed For Young Couple’s Act

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 841, 9 December 1929, Page 1

Father Blamed For Young Couple’s Act

FALSE DECLARATION MARRIAGE OF DEFIANCE Blaming the father’s intolerance and unpleasantness toward his daughter, whom he was accused of attempting to assault even after her marriage, Mr. Crimp offered an explanation of the offence of a young couple, William Platt and Eleanor Benson Platt, 17, in making a false declaration of the girl’s age under the Marriage Act, when they appeared for sentence in the Supreme Court today. THE father laid the information with - 1 - the object of having his daughter punished, said Mr. Crimp. When interviewed by the police the young couple had been frank and honest in their statement and, although the police could have taken immediate action, they preferred to obtain a birth certificate from England.' The girl had suffered worry and anxiety over the pending prosecution. There was never any valid objection to the marriage, but, although the full facts were placed before the father, consent was withheld. No magistrate would have refused permission for the marriage, added counsel. Mr. Justice Smith: Why did they not apply. Mr. Crimp: Because they didn’t know they could. Counsel pointed out that if the girl had married a man unworthy of her she would pay for it all her life, and he, therefore, considered an admonition would meet the case. The young man was encouraged by the father in his relationship with the girl, but when consent was sought it was refused. Counsel pointed out that although the young man had signed the document he later retracted his statement, and the registrar would have been willing to strike out his name had he been asked. “If parents unreasonably refuse consent to a marriage, the law provides an alternative method—not by making a false declaration, but by applying to the magistrate,” remarked his Honour. “Apparently the prisoners were not aware of this procedure, but that did not justify his treating a false declaration lightly. The girl was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence if called upon in six months, and the male accused was admitted to probation for 12 months, conditional upon paying the costs of the prosecution.