Norwich bulletin., 1912-01-27

Oh the strength of that statement was
given employment. He left town on
Wednesday Of this week, returning to
Webster.
At an afternoon session Of the court
Mrs. Georgian9 Paquin and Peter st.
Onge were presented, the former
charged with failure to send her son,
Louis, IA, to school. the latter for
having failed TO see that his daugh-
ter Helen, "A, was kept at her studies
Both pleaded guilty Mrs. Paquin
counts, st, Onge IS, a dollar on each
Of five counts. Mrs. Paquin paid, and
Ir. st. Onge agreed to.
The Paquin case was something Of
peculiar nature and during the hear
ing of it Mrs. Paquin lost her poise
and became angry for a minute, her
venom being directed against Agent
Simmons, who was in court. On Au-
gust 80, Mr.. Simmons sent a notice
to Mrs. Paquin in which she was in
formed that she must keep Louis at
sckooi until he was 16 or until he
could pass the examination Of the
state board of education emitting him
to a certificate to go to work. Louis
failed to attend school regularly IN
September and it develops, his moth
er admitting it, that he was sent dur
ing the latter part of September to
BaldWinsville, Mass, to stay with his
grandfather, and that he had been at
work in a factory there He is at
present in Putnam with his grand
father, visiting the boys mother.
Mr. Simmons stated his opinion to
the court that the boy was sent UP
into Massachusetts, purposely to avoid
the labor laws of this state and that
he might be allowed to work there.
This belief, as stated, aroused Mrs,
Pequins ire and she Indignantly said
1T was a liel'' This did not jar Mr..
Simmons, however, his opinion as to
the facts in the case being very
strong. Judge Fuller admonished
Mrs Paquin to the effect that she
must not make her statements so
strong, and called her attention to the
fact that Mr.. Simmons was simply
acting in the performance of his duty,
without any anlmosity toward her.
Mrs. Paquin explained, she is ro-
bust woman of middle age, that she
had all she could do to support her
self; that her father had had her boy
tc bring up and that she had sent
the little fellow to Massachusetts
Baldwlnsville-to live with him.
Mrs. Paquin's argument was a Pc
culiar one. She said that while the
boy was visiting with her she would
see that he went to school, but from
what she said farther it was to be in
ferred that she did not care to be held
responsible as to wether the boy went
to work or to school while he was in
her fathers charge; in fact, she stat
ed that while the boy was with her
father he could do as he saw fit with
him. She was told by Judge Fuller
| that she must keep the boy at school
as long as he remained here, and
| agreed to do so
Mr.. st. Onge pleaded his small wage
as an excuse for not being able tC
keep his girl in school, but his prin-
cipal reason for not having kept heT
| at her studies was that he believed he
was complying with the law when he
sent her to a private night school.
In discussing the cases, Mr.. Sim
mons stated to the court that there
| seemed to be little use in showing
leniency SO as to allow those hailed
into court TO answer to such charges
to go away without paying a penalty
Leniency only results In causing more
| violations of the child labor law. Mr.
| Simmons did rot exhibit any desire
to punish individuals. but he was In
sistent on general principle, that
children should not be deprived o1
what they are rightfully entitled to IL
| the wnSs Of education.