The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-05-09
Supreme Court
Before Hon. Judge Roosevelt.

INTERESTING CASE As TO THE CUSTODY OF CHILD.
NAY SIN ne Case Of Auyphyw Aarphy-Judge Rooss-
vsls rendered decision in this suit, which was an ap
Question for the custody Of child aged nine years. son
Of the sitter OF the respondent and which the respondent
claims to hold - an adopted child.
RoosEvlIr 1.-THE child whose custody disputed In
this an interesting boy nine years Of whose
~ thus far has been spsnt with aunt and uncle,
only esven weeks old-h father and what Is per-
Aps more IMPORTANT his mother sgave him. is ad
somnendable Of motives those who had ever since
with more possible than mothers and fathers solicit
tude, watched over his infancy and to whom the lad
tton The question is, shall they under these circum
and at this late PERIOD after many years Of
No interest of the child demands the sacrifice. On the
contrary his education his inclination, his prospects ia
h ALL ~ far - can now be seen or foreseen, will DO
best promoted by his remaining with his adopted parents
OF their own once numerous family, all are dead ex
eept helpless daughter. Their means ample,
and their disposition to apply them not disputed. They
not emily willing but anxious to aud provide for
t&is child In all respects be had spraog from their
own ioids Nine years Of probation aad APPRECIATION
have sufficiently established ksr sincerity ana their shi
N.Y. Have the natural parents in such paramount
legal casmsf 1t seems 10 they have not TIE Court
(ssys Chancellor Kent Com 1867 will Investigate the
and Will NOT always and Of course take child though
under fourteen years OF sgs from the possession Of
fAd person. and deliver over to the father against the
WIN OF the child. The Court Will consult the inclination
Of the infant Fit be Of sufficiently mature aga to judge
for and control the right Of the father to the
poscsson and education his child when the nsture Of
ths case appears to warrant yhe last Supreme Court
In Jobnsons Reports 32S) applied this rule TO the case
Of two children Of the If McDowes Of whom was
H. AID the other only yesrs OF age In the present
oase besides interest and inclination Of the child,
there b, in my view, something nearly approaching 70
rsht the part Of the adopted parents The child
given to them by those who, OF one Of whom had BY
law the right to make the gift The statute Of gaar.
dianshp q R. s. 1907 dearss that every father Of child
under tweay may dispose OF its custody and tuition
during Its minority for any less ume to any person.
Ordinarily deed win is for that purpose but
do not nine years OF undsputed possession the
part and Of uninterrupted acquiesencs the other
situte good evidence Of the understanding OF the par
ties a. any written instrument In ordinary contracts
relating property where the statute Of frauds requires
them to be in wiring 1t is still priaciple OF equity
jurisprudence that part performances creates an
70 the general rule. In this there Is not only part
performance but q most substantial part Nine years,
the earliest Of the twenty may be lastly considered
~ more than half chd's min ,rty. Having under the
verbal gift performed duties for nine the
uncle aunt especially when in accordance with the
ohilds interests and ucnstions, entitled to pAreots
rights. Those who have borne the Of the chd's
early infancy should enjoy the comforts Of his matursr
years. Ordered that the demurrer to the return made to
The wit OF hsbeas corpus be overruls and that the
tody Of the child be adjudged to the defendants.