The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-01-25
HABEAS CORPUS GRANTED
Mrs. Wilkins by Judge Harper-She Is
Trying to Find Her Children.
Beard of Children's Guardians Defendant In
the Case-Heavy Fine for Trespass-lnsur-
ance Claimed by Nitterhouse's Widow.

The Board of Children's Guardians once
more finds itself INV olved in q legal fight
with Mrs. Georgia Ann Wilkins. formerly
Van Walters. to retain its custody of Mary
Cordelia, William Frederick and Clara
Ellen Van Walters, children of the plaintiff.
aged twelve eight and five years, respect
lively. On June 20. 1891. the board learned
that the children in question were not sur
rounded by proper influences. and under it's
legal authority. took possession of them
through one of its agents and refused Mrs.
Wilkins permission to see them, and de-
clined to impart to her any information as
to their whereabouts or we'll being. Later.
by proceedings in the Circuit Court. the
board was given custody of the children,
upon default of the appearance of the
mother to defend the action.
After custody had been granted
the board the mother filed proceed
ings to have the default set aside and
for custody of Ter children. She alleged
that at the time OF the hearing OF the petit
tion of the board for possession of the
children she was so crszed with grief over
their loss that she neglected to appear and
oppose the petition. This case. in which
she attacked the constitutionality of the
law creating the board. was decided
against her and she appealed to
the Supreme Court where the decision
of the lower court was afnrmed.
The mother, however. wild with grief at
the loss of her children. did not propose to
be stopped by mere technlcalites OF law,
and has never ceased her efforts to obtain
possession of her children or learn something
as TO their whereabouts. yesterday she
instituted habeas corpus proceedings, and
In her application for the writ arrai gns the
board for cruel innuman and brutal treat
ment of n mother who is seeking to learn
even if they be dead or alive" she alleges
that she has been thrust out of the
office of the board. when she would
60 to them seeking some Information
regarding her children. and says that
member of the board had said to a news
paper reporter that she should never see or
know W har;had become of her children. She
again asks the court to inquire into the
"constitutionallty and legality of the cruel.
and inhuman, and barbarOue treatment ana
punishment of these innocent children
accused of no crime-ln thus cOncealing
them and all knowledge of them from
| their mother, in violation of the laws of
God and humanity as well as the provis-
ions of our own State and federal constl.
tutlons."
On presentation to Judge Harper, q writ
was issued, made returnable at 2 O'Clock,
FRIDAY afternoon, at which time the legal
custodian of the children Will be deter
mined.
Smiths Flood Of Briefs.
The Attorney general filed with the
Clerk of the Supreme Court, yesterday, q
brief, setting forth his rights to petition
for rehea ring in the gerry mander case.
The averments recite that the Attorney
general. by order of the court. was admit
ted as o party to the suit to represent the
State. The whole people of the State were
affected by the claim Of the relator
that he had been deprived of
his constitutional righto as o
| citizen through law which
he charged was not constitutional. yet the
rights were unprotected. it is alleged. by
ything the relator intended to do. The
defendants failed to defend the people. and
the Attorney general was Invited to make
such defense as he deemed proper. The de-
| cisiOn of the court on the motion that ho
be excluded from defending tho case aD-
pears conclusive of his right to Defend for
| all purposes. The defendants failed TO
| make real defense in the Circuit Court,
and have led no brief for the appellant is.
| The appellants have made no argument
| and only signed agreements with appellee.
| which embarrassed the Attorney general
| in the management of the cass. Its pre-
| sumed that the court believed that the
| people would be better protected In their
| rights by the Attorney general. and If the
| latter ia not the real party defendant in
| this suit. then there is no real party ad-
versary to the appellee. 1t is submitted
| that, under the order of the court.
the Attorney general. being party to the
suit. has sufficient interest to entitle him
| to a petition for q rehearing and q cor
| rection of errors.
| Appealed Because of Extraordinary Fine.
| Upon an affidavit by AID Hereth. owner
of the Hcreth Block. Henry MoDermlt,
janltor and lessee of the upper portion OF
the building. was fined $40 and costs for
malicious trespass by Squire Johnson.
The unusual severity OF the fine imposed
aroused the ire of McDermIt. and he re-
| fused to submit, and took an appeal to the
| higher courts. MoDermits wife was ar
| rested at the same time upon q similar
| charge but the case against her was dis.
| missed. The trespass complained of was
| the spsinklIng of ashes on the floor of q
| closet in the building. which clogged M
the water pipes and prevented the flow OF
| sewage.