The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1890-07-19
DR.. OLCOT'TS SKELETON.
1t Is a Family One, and Is
Exhibited in the Court
of Chancery this
Morning.

A skeleton in one of the most promi-
nent families in the northern part of the
State was laid bare this morning in the
Court of Chancery. Mrs Fannie K Oh
colt, through her counsel. Willard c..
Fisk, sued out a writ of habeas corpus
directing her husband, Dr. Charles Au-
gustus Olcott, TO produce before the
Chancellor the bodies of their two chill
dren. Cornelius and Margaret Bruce Oh
colt, whom she claimed were unlawfully
withheld from her. The writ was return
able this morning, and DIR. Olcott was
present with the two children.
They are beautiful boy and girl with
dark blue eyes and light golden hair.
The boy is about five years of age and the
girl about three. DIR. Olcott is a tall, Dig
nifed looking gentleman with flowing
side whiskers. He was accompanied by
his counsel, Mr.. Steele, of Paterson, his
father and mother, q nurse and several
female relatives.
Mrs. Olcott, who is a fine looking
young woman, whose features are repro
duced in the faces of the children, was
accompanied BY her mother and brother
and a nurse, who carried her third child.
large eyed, rosy checked boy OF four
months.
Three prettier children were never in
the Court of Chancery. and they attracted
more attention than the sensational
features of their parents troubles.
ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE MOTHER.
Mr.. Steele read the return to the writ,
| in which DR.. Olcott claims that his wife
left his home on July 15, 1889, and that
| she is of such habits as to render her an
unfit person to have the custody of the
children; that the boy, Cornelius, is of
such a nervous physical disposition that
he is in constant fear of his mother, runs
away from her when she comes near him
| and evlnces disposition to avoid her.
Mr.. Fisk was somewhat surprised at
| the allegations in the return, especially
| that which questioned Mrs. Olcott's
| moral character, and wanted to take tes-
| timony on the spot to disprove the charge.
| But Mr. Steele declared that it would be
| impossible for him to produce evidence
| at that time to substantiate his allegation
| and on that representation the case went
over to Thursday. Mr.. Fink then raised
| the question of who was entitled to the
! temporary custody of the children pend
| ing the determination of the controversy,
| and said that he had received informa-
| tion to the effect that since the writ had
| been served upon DIR. Olcott the children
| had been removed from the State and the
Doctors home closed.
He also claimed that as the children
were under the age of five years, the
mother was entitled to their custody
| under the statute. Mr.. Steele replied
| that the children had only been taken to
Brooklyn yesterday so that they could be
| ing the fatiguing journey from Green
wood Lake, where they have been stay
| ing
| THE FATHER KEEPS THE CHILDREN
The Chancellor said that owing to the
| allegation against the mothers character
| set forth IN the return he would not dis
| turb the present custody, but If there
| were any fears that the doctor would re-
move the children from the jurisdiction
] of the Court he would compel him to give
| bonds Mr. Fisk waived the bonds.
| During the proceedings the boy played
about his fathers knees, evincing his
| affection for his father in hundred
childish ways, and finally, curling up in
| his lap, went to sleep. AT one time the
| doctor had occasion to pass where his
| wife was sitting in such manner that
he could not help but look her in the
face. Instead of doing SO. however, he
| covered his face with his hat.
The parties in this controversy are both
people of wealth and social prominence.
| The husband is q physician with an ex-
tensve practice. The wife was u Miss
Kirby, of Montclair, who was much adj
mired for her wit aud beauty. They
were married about six years and ap-
parently lived happily together until last
July, when q separation took place for
what reason does not appear. The doctor
claims that she deserted him, while Mrs.
Alcott alleges that she was driven from
her home.
There is another phase of the contro-
versy in the Passaic courts, before Judge
Hopper, Some time after leaving hor
husbands house Mrs. Olcott went there
and obtained possession of the boy. She
was leaving with him when DR.. Olcott's
father caught her by the throat, as she
alleges, and choked her until she was
compelled to give up the boy. For this
case will be tried Wednesday. In view
Of the allegations made In tho retarn to
the writ it is expected that the testimony
on Thursday will be exceedingly inter
esting.