The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1870-12-31 00:00:00

A CURIOUS CASE.

A petition has been presenteil under extraordinary
circumstances in the Court of Chancery, Dublin. It
raises a rather novel question, as to the power of the
Lord Chancellor to override the authority of a father
in the religions education of his infant children. The
petitioner is Miss Mary Catherine Ronayne, the ma-
ternal aunt of the children, whose mother died three
years ago. The respondent is Mr. Meade, a respect-
able solicitor of Dublin.
The following is an outline of the case :

in September, 1E459, Mr Meade, who is • Protestant, the
eon of • clergyman of
,the Ritablished Couch, and having two
brothers also In Holy Orders. married the petitioner's sister,
who was a Roman Catholic. It wax alleged by the petitioner,
bet denied by the respondent, that before the marriage there
mu a promise on his part that the female children should he
brought up Roman Catholics. On the 24th of June, 10140,
the eldest of two daughters, the subjects of the retition,
was born, and on the 11th of July, 1061, the second
girl was born. Both were baptizsd Roman Catholic..
In October, 867, • third daughter we, been, and
n twelve days after her birth her mother died. The
children were brought up Roman Catholics with his
full concurrence, and on the day of his wife's burial he re-
minted the petitioner, as she alleged, to take the youngest
child to a Roman Cstholic clergyman asd have it bayt,se,l
She resided in the house, and had the care of the children
until the al:h of July last, when he again married. Ills
second wile was • Mies Jameson, a lady of strong Protestant
convictions. The new matrimonial alliance effected • total
change in hi. views as to the education of his children, and
on the Kith of March last, after the intended marriage had
been seri. ged, he communicated his new impressions in a
long letter to Mrs. Nagle, • sister-In-law, who had advise.'
him to send the two eldest daughters to school, and to in-
trust the youngest to the guardianship of the petitioner.
the spirit of the letter Is conveyed lu the following pas-
sage:
- - • • • •

-
"Before replying to your letter. I wish to say a word
about Mies Jameson, and do not imagine for one moment
that the resolutions I have come to are brought about by her,
or from say other human being, and only emanate from lay
own hone 4 convictions. I never met a lady with, I think,
a stronger sense of pure religion, and this I consider a great
matter, for I regret to eay that until I met her I have been
for the last twelve years or more most unmindful of the world
to come, and have not during that period been at
church Mx times. Since I met her I go regularly
to church, and upon next Sunday I reed's the Sacra-
ment. I feel that if I brought up my children of •
different religion from Miss Jameson and myself that I
should he doing them • grievous wrong, and that I should
be condemned by every honest heart for doing so. Just for
one moment fancy my telling my darling children to leave
the room, tight and morning, while Miss Jameson • d I had
Islay prayers; fancy me leaving their religious, and, there
fore, their moral training to servants' Tell me that you
want me to cut off my right hand for my children, and I will
answer to you 'yes,' but to these two things I soy neVer.'
All my relations are Protestants, so are Mb. Jameson'k I
have a father and brother in the Church. Mtn Jameson has
• brother; think you that I wish to cut off my children
from thoee whom I know will love them and I cannot
bring myself to believe that the making of them Protes-
tant. will change your feelings towards them, for, II so,
word. are in vain " .

yam
Next day he communicated his intentions to the petitioner,
and • domestic scene ensued which was evidently one of no
ordinary excitement. The children clung to Mins Ronayne,
and appealed to their father not to change their religion.
no exclaimed that he had taken an oath to do so, and then,
in the presence of the petitioner and his daughters, he knelt
down and renewed his vow. One of the group ran scream-
ing out into the street (Fitawllliam-sguarei, and people
began to Collect about the house. Mr. Meade stated In him
affidavit, and thepetitioner denied it, that on hearing of his in-
tentions as to the children, she sprung up from the breakfast
table, caught him hp the collar, and unintentionally struck
him in the face. The children, who were upstairs, hearing
the noise, came down, sad she flung herself helm the eldest,
and told tilt child that her father was going to be married to
a strange woman and to bring them up in • different religion
from that of their mother. They were under the twinned=
that they were to be taken away from their aunt and there-
fore chins to her. The petitioner declared that the would
rather see them dead than brought up Protestant. Ac-
cording to the petitioner's affidavit, the children said they
would not have their religion changed, and when the eldest,
who ran out into the street, was brought back the took up •
knife, and declared that "she would kill herself, and called
upon her Saviour to take her away before such a thing hap-
pane o " the letttlooer, however, we. inducel to remain
In the =Use until the second marriage, and She Children
wen seal So a Prolsdrat 164 In Madinah IlwrisSilmield

afliiViióáid even
express a preference for the Protestant religion. They at-
tend Sunday school and church regularly. The petitioner
memento that their acquiescence in the change Is not Volun-
tary or reaL
- - - - -

Mr. Butt, Q.C., who appeared with Mr. Palle!,
Q.C., for the petitioner, maintained that the inter.
ference of the rerpmclent with the religious faith of
his children was as bad as in Shelley's case, where it
was held to be sufficient to warrant the interposition
of the Court. He cited numerous authorides to sup-
Part his argument that the Lord Chancellor ehoulci
comply with the prayer of the petition by making the
two eldest children Wards of court, and giving them
over to the guardianship of their aunt.
' '•

- o
Dr. Ball, Q.C., replied for the respondent, when the
e was adjourned for further discussion.