CHILD BORN OF CRIMINAL ACT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17832, 28 April 1926, Page 5

CHILD BORN OF CRIMINAL ACT.

MOTHER SHOULD NOT MAINTAIN IT, SAYS MAGISTRATE. Never before in English law has a Court been called upon to decide a question which came up at the Christchurch Magistrate's Court this morning. Mr 11. A. Young, S.M., was asked to decide whether a child conceived as the result of the rape of the mother was that woman's child, for which she must be responsible. The Magistrate did not give a direct decision on the question of principle, but stated that under the circumstances of the case the woman should not be made to support the child. It seemed to him that the case was one in which the upkeep of the child, who was in a receiving home, should be borne by the State. The question arose out of a case in which the police proceeded against a young married man for maintenance of a child, eleven years jof age. This child ■was the result of carnal knowledge of a girl of fourteen by her step-father. This occurred in 1914, and the man received two years’ imprisonment. The step-father is now undergoing a sentence of five vears’ imprisonment for rape of the child thus conceived, at eleven years of age. Mr S. E. M’Carthy appeared for the mother’s husband, who was proceeded against for maintenance of the child. The mother of the defendant, it was stated, had maintained the child until last January, when she refused to do so any longer. Mr M’Carthy said the circumstances under which the case had been brought were very extraordinary indeed. He was very much surprised at the police bringing the case forward. What the State was trying to do was to make the innocent victim of a cruel, brutal, and lustful outrage, pay for the maintenance of a child which was conceived against her will. The Magistrate: Make her husband pay, you mean. Mr M’Carthy: If she is not liable, her husband is not. “If the defendant is found responsible in this case,” continued Mr M'Carthy, “ it will mean that the legal historical traditions are gone, and that the legal institutions, in my opinion, have reached the depths of infamy. Although the child was born of this woman, it is, to all intents and purposes, not her child, for she had maternity thrust upon her. If this woman is to be considered the mother of the child, then the most extraordinary results will follow'. It would be misuse of terms. Where a signature has been obtained under compulsion, such is not considered lawful.

“ I suggest a rule for the Courts in regard to the discretionary clause of the Act:—‘That the liabilities caused by the misfits of the State should not, where the offender has not an estate of his own, be cast upon the innocent victims of the outrage; that the liability, if the man has no estate, should be borne by the State itself.’ ” When Mr M’Carthy sought to call further evidence, the Magistrate said such w’ould not be necessary, and he gave his decision on the question. Mr M’Carthy: I ask, your Worship, that the Press be requested to omit publication of the defendant’s name. She has suffered far too much already.

The Magistrate: I will leave that to the discretion, of the Press, which I have never Jound to have* attempted to cause undue cruelty.