The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-10-31
WHOSE BABY WAS HELENp
A Large Fortune Depends Upon the
Courts Decision.
From the Nelo York Herald.

from the NeLp I OfN
If Mrs. Ella M. Pike was ever the wife
of Daniel j. Stack, she is entitled, whether
his will stands or falls, to a good slice in
his estate. If her ably, who was baptized
Helen Stack, was Mr.. Stacks legitimate
daughter. Mrs. Pike will enjoy the entire
property.
1t is an open question whether the mar
riage ceremony between Mr.. Stack and the
present Mrs. Pike, which was performed in
Philadelphia, on Dec. 10, 1888, made the
woman, who was then known as Ella John
son, his wife and legitimized the baby, then
nearly 9 months old.
Thomas Stack, the father of Daniel,
claims the property and insists that the
woman was never his daughter-in-law. II
the badly, Helen, was really her child-and
old Mr.. Stack does not seem to be very
sure of that-he positively asserts that his
son was never its father, legitimate or
illegitimate.
On these allegations Mr.. Stack has begun
a suit in the court of common pleas against
Benjamin F. Fairchild, as trustee under
the will of Daniel Kelly, and Mrs. Pike
His attorney. Frederick Hemming. has just
served the summons and complaint III the
action and has retained as counsel aldort
IL. Phillips, an able lawyer, whose knowl-
edge of the complicated marriage laws in
different states Will be of great value when
the case comes to trial.
NICE BONE TO PICK.
The story told in the complaint is very
curious. Daniel Kelly, whose daughter
was the wife of Thomas Stack, died in 1859,
leaving his property to his executor, Daniel
OCcnnor, in trust for his two grandchil-
dren, Daniel j. and Helena Stack, with the
provision that on the death of either one of
them, without issue, the entire income
should go to the survivor, and that if both
died. leaving no descendants, the money
should go to their next of kin. The last ac-
counting made by MIR. O'Connor, who died
in February, 1881, showed tat the estate
was worth $50, S62. and yielded an annual
income of ST. 1000, and since then the value
has largely increased. Mr. Fairchild was
appointed trustee after Mr.. O'Connor's
death, and as Miss Stack died at about that
time he paid the whole income to her
brother, who survived until April %, 1885.
Mr.. Sta k, ST., claims to be the sole heir to
his sons property, including his interest lii
the Kelly estate.
Daniel Stack was married to Miss Eva l..
Nischwjtz on May Z, 1878, and lived with
her for about three years, when she left
him. Some time after she obtained di-
vorce on account of his liaison with Miss
Johnson There were no children by this
marriage, and old Mr.. Stack positively as
SeTLS UndD III was liupUSSlDlo lOT LIS sun 10
become a father. The degree of divorce pro-
hibIted Stack from remarrying during the
lifetime of Mrs. Stack.
THE BIRTH AND THE MARRIAGE.
Stack lived openly with Miss johnson at
No. 40 Lexington avenue. She was, ac-
cording to the sworn complaint, notori-
ouslv prodIgal with her favors. From the
life she had led for many years and all the
other surrounding circumstances, old Mr..
Stack does not believe that sac could have
become mother. On May l6, 1882, the
couple reno we'd to Sound Beach, Conn. and
less than year later the baby, whose
brief existence caused so much tronble,
was born, ''if," says the complaint. Ella
M. Pike gave birth to any child, as alleged,
Daniel j. Stack was not its father and the
child was fraudulenlly imposed and foisted
upon him"
There is no doubt that young Stack re-
cognzed Helen as his daughter. A few days
after the decree of divorce was granted ne
took flying trip to Philadelphia with Miss
johnson and went through the form of mar
riage. 1t is charged that the ceremony was
brought about by fraud and deceit while the
man was ''au imbecile and OF unsound mind
and otherwise Incapable of entering into
any marriage contract"
After Stacks death, Mrs. Pike filed in the
surrogates Office his will, bequeathing to
executrix. This instrument was admitted
to probate, though old Mr.. Stack insists
that his son was utterly incapable of under
standing what he was doing at the time of
its alleged execution, and that the signature
was procured by force and undue influence
exerted by Mrs. Pike and other persons act
ing in collision with her. He declares that
the woman's proceedings from beginning to
end were part of her scheme to get posses
sion Of the money. He asks for an injunc-
ton restraining her from Opposing of any of
the property in her hands and prohibiting
Mr.. Falrchild from making any payments
to her. His suit is III brief, to have the
court pronou nee the second marriage void,
declare that Daniel Stack was not the father
OF the child Helen, who has since died, and
revoke the probate of the will.
A FEW LAW POINTS.
If the marriage is found to have been
valid and the child Legitimate, Mr.. Stack,
ST., would get the estate subject to the
widows dover if the will be overthrown.
The question of law involved are very in
teresting. Under the laws of Pennsylvania,
where the second marriage took place, the
husband who has been guilty of infidelity is
prohibited from marrying the woman with
whom the offense was committed during the
lifetime of his former wife, Mr.. Stacks
counsel says that if Mrs. Eva L. Stack
L
her husband surely could not have mar
ried Ella johnson in that state, and con-
sequently could not have legitimized the
child.
The validity of the MARI ge must be de-
cided by the law OF the place where it is
celebrated, and if valid there, it is so held
everywhere. 1t is asserted that Stacks
second venture was illegal in Pennsylvania,
though if he had had the ceremony per-
formed in Connecticut, where he was living
at the time, it would have been perfectly
good, as tn states statutes have no restric-
ton in snch cases.
Pennsylvania has very liberal statute
providing that sin any and every case
where the father and mother of an ilegiti-
mate child shall enter into the bonds of we'd
lock and cohabit, such child shall thereby
become legitimate and enjoy all the rights
and privileges as if he or she had been born
during the wedlock." In other words, the
marriage is made to date back to the birth
of a child. This statute is founded on
public policy and seeks to remedy the slips
and falls from the strict path Of morality
to which men and women are prone. The
claim is made that Helen could not be legiti-
mized by the Pennsylvania marriage be-
cause she was born while her alleged father
had wife living who was not even divorced
from him at the time
If this view of the law is sustained by the
court Mr.. Stack can contest his sons will.
At the time of the probate the surrogate
held that ne had no standing to contest tbs
Of