SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 16521, 23 August 1919, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

(Before Mr. Justice Hosking.) CONCLUSION OF SESSION. WILL OF H. B. CURTIS, DECEASED This morning further argument was heard in the case of E. W. M. Lysons and others (plaintiffs) and Caroline Curtis and others (defendants), in the matter of the will of the late H. B. Curtis. His Honour withheld his judgment. PETITION. GUARDIANSHIP OP A CHILD. In the matter of Cariita Esme Merle Knight, an infant, Mrs. Mary A. Ludecke (Mr. A. H. Johnstone) applied for an order appointing her guardian of the person and estate, she being tho grandmother of the child. The parents (Mr. and Mrs. Nolan Francis Knight) wore represented by Air, Ronald H. Quilliam. Mr. Johnstone explained that the petitioner had one daughter by a former marriage and tills daughter was married in December, 1905, to Nolan Francis Knight. Knight did not then provide a home for his wife and, when the child was horn in the following year, Mrs. Ludecke went to Christchurch and brought her daughter and the baby back to her home in Dannevirke. The daughter afterward returned to her husband, and there were six other children of the marriage, but the first child remained with the grandmother from, then onwards, and had always homd tho name of her grandmother and not of her parents. The affidavits in the proceedings showed that the parents were in poor circumstances. In answer to his Honour, Mr, Quilliam said the parents desired to have the custody and maintenance of the' child. Air. Johnstone said it was significant that the father had been imprisoned for debt as late as December of last year. On many occasions he had borrowed money from Mrs. Ludecke. At the present time he was working as a clerk at a sawmill at Dannevirke, where his family were living with him. Prior to this they had been living at Dargaville, where they were unsuccessful in business. At the beginning of 1918 Airs. Ludecke brought the family to Dannevirke at her own expense and maintained them for three months at her house. I Air. Ludecke, husband of petitioner, set Knight up in a cordial manufacturing business, but the latter did not give it attention and the support was withdrawn. It was not until early in the present year that the father first demanded the return of the child. ‘With the full consent of the parents Mrs. Ludecke brought the child to Oakura, and' in due course entered her at the boarding establishment of the New Plymouth Girls’ High School. There she remained until .June 24 of the present LKealvGwhcn. a lady who said she was Esme Ludecke’s mother called 1 at the' school and, as a result, the child was spirited away. She was taken by-motor-ear to Inglewood, and thence by train to Dannevirke. Later the child herself came hack- from Dannevirke’to Oakura by motor-car. Airs. Ludecke had written to a garage proprietor in Dannevirke. A demand had been made for the return of the child to the parents and, as it would obviously not be in her interest to be bandied about between the two parties, the application for guardianship was made. There was a difference m religion. Tho parents were Roman Catholics, and the child had been brought, up as a Protestant. It was understood that she was to he »sent by the parents to a Convent school at Dan--nevirke. Air. Quilliam said the parents regarded as unjustifiable interference the arrangements made for the return of the child to New Plymouth. They stated they were in a. position to keep the child. Referring to the legal position, tho speaker said the parents had allowed the grandmother to have custody hut had not’ abandoned their rights. Tlicro was no suggestion that the grandmother was not a fit person to have tho care of the child. A suggestion was made by His Honour that instead of taking the violent step of transferring guardianship ha should make an, order for the child to remain in the custody of fine grandmother on the understanding that, if the parents desired custody, they should take steps under a writ of Habeas Corpus. Air. Johnstone said that he .'ought, in the circumstances as known to him, to as> for the guardianship order. The judge intimated that he would make his decision known as soon as possible. families’ pi N act.CLAIM FOR SHARE OF ESTATE. Under the provisions of The Families’ Protection Act, William George Berridgo, carpenter, New Plymouth, applied for a share in the estate of Clara Ainslie (deceased), his mother. Air. C. H. Croker appeared for plaintiff, and Air. A. R. Standish appeared for Annie Marshall, and others interested in the estate. , It was stated that the net value of the estate was £ISOO, and that it had been left to threo daughters. There were three sons, but the two apart from plaintiff were not considered, to bo likely to apply for a share, in view of their circumstances. His Honour agreed to make an order that the estate should bo charged with the sum of £230 (a sixth share) in favour of plaintiff. The ■ costs ' were to bo paid out of the estate.

SETTLED OR ADJOURNED. An adjournment was granted in tho civil action; The’ New Zealand'Loan and Alercantilo Agency Company, Ltd., v. Robert Willis, claim for £432 and interest. 'The two following actions were withdrawn : C. William Williams v. Henry George Knight—claim for dissolution of partnership; William A. O’Callaghnn v. Benjamin Young -.Shaw —claim for £267 10s. ' , Two cases under the Admiralty jurisdiction—Spedding and Stainton v. the ship Ottillic Fjord, and Burgess, Fraser and Co:, Ltd., v. the ship Ottillic Fjord —were adjourned, there being negotiations for settlement. An adjournment to next- session “was made in the appeal of William George Emeny (appellant), and Jeremiah John Nolan (respondent) against the determination of Air. J. W. Poynton, S.M., at New Plymouth. The session of the court concluded at 12.30.