UNWANTED CHILDREN

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 19580, 3 June 1926, Page 7

UNWANTED CHILDREN

CHARGE ON THE STATE MOTHER ORDERED TO PAY. COURT EARMARKS PROSPECTTVE LEGACY. (Per Press Association.) CHRISTCHURCH, June 2. Coming to the conclusion that a woman’s children will by the time they are all in a position to support themselves have cost the State £1520, the Education Department, through the police, proceeded against the mother in the Magistrate’s Court this morning for the making of an order against her, to be paid from a legacy which the woman is to receive at some future date, to pay the cost of their present maintenance. Mr. IL A. Young, 8. AL, was on the bench. Mr. Brown, for the defendant, said that the circumstances of the case were extraordinary. The woman had had a considerable number of illegitimate children, and it was impossible to find the father of any of them. The eldest child was committed to a receiving home in 1909 and was now self-support-ing. In 1924 another was committed to the care of the State, but had become self-supporting since tho complaint was made. In October, 1924, more children were committed to the Christchurch Receiving Home, and since that time another had been born, which would become a charge on tho State. Defendant’s mother, who was still living, was left a life interest in £4OOO, and had contributed to the support of tho children, having already paid the Education Department £366. After her death a share of this estate, some £5OO or £6OO, would go to the defendant and the Education Department asked that an order should be made against tho defendant for some portion of tho money which would come to her. It had already, counsel said, cost tho State £575 to support the defendant’s children and it w r as estimated that a further £950 would be spent before they were in a position to support themeelves. The Magistrate said that defendant’s children would have cost the State about £l5OO by the time they were selfsupporting. He thought that some of the money coining to her should be earmarked so that the children would not continue to be a burden on the public purse. An order was made accordingly, that the defendant should pay £1 Is each for the maintenance of tw'o children, and Ils a week for a third, a total of £2 13s. The Magistrate said that he did not expect that the defendant should pay the charges at present, but arrears could be deducted from her legacy ‘when it came to her.