National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1879-01-20
Mother vs.. Grandmother.

tracing considerable interest, came up for
hearing before Justice Wylle Saturday. The
facts Of the case. which have been related at
length in The REPUBLICAN,, are briefly as
follows; Mrs Mary J. Hazel was married to
Charles II. O'Brien in 1871, aud during the
continuance Of the marriage became tho
mother of II little girl now named Mary Rose
OIircn, and seven years of age In 1879
O'Bren was convicted of murder and scn-
fenced to bo hanged, but the sentence was
committed subsequently to imprisonment for
life. A year ago his wife applied for divorce,
but the bill was dismissed. Acting upon le-
gal advice she was united in mar
ragc to her present husband, John T.
Hazel and retained tho custody of
the child, as O'Bricm, it was held was dead in
legal contemplation, and she was widow aud
the surviving parent. Last November O'Bren
was pardOned and released from prison. At his
earnest solicitation, as stated in Mrs. Hazels
petition, she has allowed the child to visit him
occasionally at the house Of his mother. On
the 10th instant the child was detained from
her by force, and Mrs. Hazel seeks now to re.
gain possession Of the child through hdJeas cor.
pus proceedings, Mrs Mary OBrion and her
son Charles IL. O'Bricn, being the respondents
Mrs Mary O'Brieu, the grandmother Of the
child in making her return to the writ, stated
indenture transferred the child to her charge
and control. The points involved in the case
affecting OBriCn's status aud the legality Of
Mrs Hu2cl's last marriage, have made the con-
test one of unusual Importance.
There was q large attendance in the court
room during the hearing Saturday. Mrs.
Mary O'Brien the respondent came into the
chamber accompanied by her granddaughter a
few minutes before the hour set for the hear.
ing. She was attred in deep morning, and
presented a pleasant face, which, at the same
| time, showed ficmuess and determination. The
| little girl over whom the contention is made
| has bright intelligent face is quito pretty
and in her childish play aud prattle while. the
| case was progressing, seemed entirely Ignorant
of the existing quarrel for the possession of
| her little body. While the case was awaiting
| the disposition Of q number of motions pend
| ing in criminal causes, the mother entered the
chamber. She proceeded directly to the seat
occupied by her daughter and raising her in
| her arms took the chair, placing the little one
| in her lap. She was plainly but nearly attired,
and there was nothing in her appearance but
| spoke for her respcctabiity and mOdesty. AL
! though the chairs of mother and grandmother
| were side by side, it was noticed that no rocog-
| milton passed between the two women Mrs
| Hazel sat so as to bring her back toward and
face in profile to the mother-in-law. The
| mother held the child close in her arms during
other ways manifesting evidences Of affection
Mr.. Hazel was also present, at times sitting
| beside his wife, but took no prominent part in
the proceedings. Charles O'Brien was not in
attendance, and, 1t is stated that he left the
| city shortly after the inlcuturng OF the child.
1t was two O'clock before the Gaze was
| reached. Mr.. Gloss counsel COr the petitioner,
said that he desired to traverse the return
/ which had been made only that morning, and
! have witnesses examined, and was not ready
| to proceed at that time.
The court told them to make up the issue
| and he would set a time when all were pre-
| pared to hear the case In chambers.
Mr. Gloss stated that the child had been with
tho mother all her life; with exception of the
past ten days, aud asked that tho mother have
tho custody OF it pending the hearing, She
would give bonds, if necessary, for its safe
keeping.
The court desired to know where the father
was. Mr. Gloss replied that he had gone to St
| Louis.
Mr.. Miller wished to say that, before he le #
he indentured his child to his mother, and
pending the hearing II should remain with her
The court said that the mother was bound t.
the child by the strongest ties and when the
father had come out Of prison with the odor o
the highest crime known to the law strOnl
about him. seized the child, and after binding
it out, left the city, he should mob countonanc,
the act by taking the child from the mother
pending Il hearing, Ho would not put the child
in the custody of any person TO whom 1t wa
bound out by runaway father. The chile
from infancy had been in the custody of thu
mother and we'll cared for. 1t was inveiglej
away and kept. Until the issues in the cast
were made up the mother should have the Gus
tody and control of the child. The father, b!
some unfair means, obtained possession of i
and bound it out to its grandmother before h
went away. All lie did now was to restore TIN
child whore 1t was before this case was brought
The hearing was set for Wednesday next, a
two o'clock.