GUARDIANSHIP CASE

Taranaki Daily News, 2 September 1933, Page 21 (Supplement)

GUARDIANSHIP CASE

CUSTODY OF BOY PIANIST. _____ i < ADOPTED MOTHER AND TEACHER. An order nisi calling upon Miss Henriet Garnaut, of Adelaide, and J. and N. Tait, Limited, to show cause why : a writ of habeas corpus should not be granted ordering them to deliver up . Philip Hargrave, the boy pianist, to his mother, was recently granted by Sii' Justice Divon in the High Court in Sydney. Last week the matter was further heard, his honour continuing the order nisi after an undertaking had been given that the boy would not be taken out of Australia except by consent of the Court. In an affidavit Mrs. Marston, professional musician and wife of Reginald Gladstone Marston, said that on August 11, by an order of the Supreme Court of New South Wales she and her husband were granted an order of adoption. From 1926 until 1929 Philip Hargrave lived with her in Adelaide under her personal care and attention, and leceived lessons in playing the piano from Miss Garnaut. He was awarded scholarships by the Conservatorium of Music in Adelaide. As Miss Garnaut lived five miles away from the home of Mrs. Marston, it was arranged, on the suggestion of Miss Garnaut, that the. boy should reside with her. On August 5, Mrs. Marston said, she went with two policemen to a house at Rushcutter Bay where she saw her son and Miss Garnaut. Her son was coming down the steps in front of the house, and Miss Garnaut called out to him: “Do not go with her Philip; come back here.” Her son had greeted her, and appeared to be surprised at her presence there, but on hearing the words of Miss Garnaut he retraced his way up the steps. The two policemen had a conversation with Mr. John Tait (of J. and N. Tait, Limited), who was also at the Rushcutter Bay house. Mr. Tait informed them that his' firm had a contract, under which they were entitled to the boy, and the police then advised Mrs. Marston that they could do nothing toward taking possession of him. The boy was now either in the custody of Miss Garnaut in Adelaide, or of J. and N. Tait, and she was afraid that he would be taken out of Australia without her consent. She was desirous that her son should be restored to her custody. . Counsel for Miss Garnaut stated that an application had been made to the South Australian Supreme Court for the appointment of a proper guardian for the boy and for the drawing up of a trust in relation to his propel ty. Mr. Justice Dixon said he had previously granted the order nisi calling on respondents to show cause why the writ should not be issued on representations that it was possible or probable that the boy might go out of Australia. He was desirous of knowing what the position was now, following his suggestion that counsel in the case should confer. . Council gave • the undertaking that the boy would not be taken out of ■ Australia without the permisson of a Justice of the High Court. Mr. Justice Dixon ?ad previously ' refused an application for the dismissal from the suit of J. and N. Tait, ' Limited, made on the grounds that as concert managers they were prepared to act for whoever became the guardian of the child, and that they had been brought into the suit unneces- ; sarily. His Honour continued the order ■ nisi.