Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1894-07-29
BYRON JOHNSON'S new TACK
now CAN A CORPORATION DE
GUARDIAN OF THE PERso.f
Little Rosa srcISnighrs Legal Rep
resentntive Amends Mrs. Me-
knights Original Answer and
Raises nm Important Point.

Attorney johnson. who represents
Mrs. Mary Mcknight, respondent In the
habeas corpus proceeding instituted TO
establish whether the mother or the
Orphans Home should have the
custody OF little Rosa Mcknight. has
taken n new tack. 1t is set forth in the
amended petition which is subjoined.
II seems probable that the point he
has made Will render unnecessary all
the evidence already gone through. The
position that a corportion cannot be the
guardian of minor Is unassailable.
The text of the petitian is as follows;
''EN-Parte. Rosa McKnight-Now
comes Mrs. Mary Mcknight. the
respondent in the above cause.
and In answer TO the writ
OF habeas corpus served upon her in
said cause. amends her original answer,
and being duly sworn, says that said
child. Rosa Mcknight. is not unlaw-
fully imprisoned or restrained OF her
liberty Illegally. but that she is in the
lawful and legal care and custody OF
respondent, who is the mother Of said
Rosa Mcknight, and therefor her
natural guardian and entitled TO the
care. custody and guardianship Of her
said child. who is only eight years OF
age
And for further answer In this
cause, respondent says that the rela-
tors petition In this cause alleges
under the oath OF one H. NJ. Burchill
that the relator is "a corporation and
not an individual and respondent says
TINT amid nlIanaI on LOT
In law have lawful custody or guar
dianship OF any child or Individual,
and therefore that this suit can not be
maintained.
And further answering herein. the
said respondent says that said alleged
corporation has no lawful right or au-
thorlty TO imprison any person or 10
restrain any person OF MIS- liberty, or
to dotain any person against his Will,
and that the imprisonment or deten-
tion Of any person by said alleged cor
porntion - In fact a deprivation OF
personal liberty without lawful au-
thurity nd without due process OF
law. and IL n crime against the Grim
inal law of the state OF Texas That
neither the said II. NJ. Burchill, alleged
TO be the superintendent OF said al
legged corporation. nor II. Q. Edring-
ton, the alleged president thereof, nor
said alleged corporation itself nor any
other person connected with said alleg-
ed corporation, has ever adopted the
said child. Rosa Mcknight, the child
sued for In this case, nor have they
ever been appointed guardian OF her
person or estate, nor has said child
ever been bound or apprenticed to said
corporation, nor TO either OF such per-
sons. nor has either OF them ever made
application for the adoption. appren-
ticeship or guardianship OF said child,
RNHn Mgluiunt nor filed my hand
therefor, as required by the laws OF the
state OF Texas, but that fiie respondent,
Mary Mcknight Is the mother and
natural guardian Of said child. and
that no other guardian has ever been
applied for nor appointed for the per-
son or entate OF said child.
"Hespcndent further says that said
alleged corporation or institution. pur-
porting to be the plaintiff or relator In
this case, Ia in fact managed and CON
trolled by one II. NJ. Burchill, who
purports to he the superintendent a
said institution, and that said b. NJ
BurChill is not ut or proper person
90 have the care. custody or control OF
said child. Rosa Mcknight. and that
said alleged corporation, purporting 10
be tho relntor In this case. II not NJ
or proper institution 20 have the care
custody or control OF said child, Rosa
Mcknight. but that said Mary Nc
guardian OF hcr said child and Ia by
nature and by law entitled TO have the
care and custody OF her said child and
that ON account OF the tender age Of
the said child, she requires the com
slant attention and clre n n mother, and
that while said respondent. Mary Me-
Knight, Is q poor and working Moman
she has the same love FOR her child MS
II she were rich, and that she IN able
by her labor to support and educate
her said child. and that said child loves
her mother, Is unwilling TO he taken
from her and turned over to said Bur
chill or TO said corporation, and that
hor said child ~ grief-stricSen and In
great terror and distress on account of
the possibility OF being torn away from
her mother and being forolbly carried
away and placed In the power OF said
Burchill. and respondent protests that
her said child be not taken away from
heT nor delivered over 70 sud ollcged
corporation nor to said Burchill. nor 10
any other person, hut that she be nj
lowed to live and remain with her
mother where her childish love natur-
ally calls her, and where she constant
w desires and by law has the right TO
be-
"And respondent further says that
shc Ia ready to verify and establish by
full and competent evidence every al
legation In this amended answer con-
tnined by ladies' and gcntlemcn OF the
highest respectnbillty and veracity, who
reside In the city OF Fort Worth. and IN
Tarrant county, Texas.
(signcd) MARY e. M'KNIGHT.
Respondent
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this July "a, 1884.
tSigned) II. II, M'NATT,
clerk or the District Court OF Tarrant
County, TeXas,
by GEORGE G, WARD.