stamp Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg. G u a r d i n s h i p A u t h o r i t y. In the Blumenau guardianship casethe Guardianship Authority, Department I, on the 23rd of July, 1912 has decided that :Correctional education of Sarah Blumenau The names were changed. [in a reform school]is ordered,for Jacob it is rejected, but the decision to withdrawchild custody of October 4, 1910 (Fol. 225) is extended to include him. Facts of the case and justification. Already in February 1909 the Public Authority for Juvenile Welfare had requested correctional education for Sarah and Jacob as well as their temporary placement [in a reform school] according to § 6 of the correctional education law (Fol. 65). The Guardianship Authority initially granted the latter request. The appeal filed by their mother was dismissed by the district court (Fol. 129/133). The Guardianship Authority rejected the request for correctional education (fol. 148/157) and initiated proceedings to withdraw custody from the mother, which then led to custody being withdrawn for Sarah by force of a decision of October 4, 1910 (fol. 225). The mother’s appeal against this decision has been dismissed by the district court in a decision of May 29, 1911 (fol. 305/317); as was another appeal filed by the mother by the appellate court on June 12, 1911 (Fol. 326). In a decision issued on June 30, 1911 (Fol. 330)the Guardianship Authority then once again ordered Sarah’s temporary placement [in a reform school] according to § 6 of the correctional education law, and the Public Authority for Juvenile Welfare then repeated its request for correctional education of both children on September 26, 1911 (Fol. 368/370). Now the Public Authority forJuvenile Welfare’s request for definite correctional education needs to be ruled on. We refer to the actual findings made by the districtcourt based on its extensive hearing of evidence in its ruling of May 29, 1911 (fol. 305 ff.), in which it dismissed the mother’s appeal against the withdrawal of custody from her, so that they do not need to be repeated here. Now the question is whether correctional education is necessary in order to prevent the children from becoming wayward by employing the appropriate methods of education. With regard to Sarah this question must be answered in the positive. According to the court district’s findings, Sarah must already be called morally corrupted. She is an extremely sly, cunning girl who is very good at acting and pretending, who feigns illness when she is supposed to do something she does not like. Most of all she lacks veraciousness. She utters deliberate lies with the greatest frankness. In doing so, she is dishonest, insolent and rude, and she is already very sexually mature. That such a girl cannot be left in the care of the kind of mother Miss Blumenau is according to the district court’s findings is obvious. The mother’s influence must be eliminated. The question is just how. The authority does indeed share the guardian’sview that it is impossible to find a family who is willing and fit to take in such a wild and difficult girl and guide her onto the right path. Neither would it be easy to find a private institution after the events that occurred at the Ross Foundation in Sylt. The mother would cause such difficulty for a family or a private institution alike that Sarah would soon be packed off again. The goal of withdrawing custody, namely to remove Sarah from her mother’s detrimental influence, would not be achieved in this way. The only means to protect her from becoming wayward is correctional education, which is justified by § 1 para 1 and § 3 of the correctional education law. The boy Jacob’s case is a different matter. He is not yet as morally corrupted as Sarah is, but he, too, must be removed from the mother’s detrimental influence so that he will not turn out the same. Yet this might be achieved without correctional education by extending the ruling to withdraw custody to him and thus giving the guardian the chance to find an appropriate home for him in a family or an institution. Since he is still small and not as sly as Sarah, the guardian will be successful in finding a home for him. Should it turn out that the mothermakes the same scenes withhim as she did with Sarah and disrupts his upbringing, correctional education would have to be ordered for him as well.