The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1896-12-01
SLACK PBRRINE CASE.
Mrs. Slack Seeks to Have the
Court of Errors Set Aside
the Chaneellor's
Decision.
Special to the Jersey citv Nsars.

TRENTON, Dec. l, 1896.-The celebrated
Slack-Perrine case, which is now before
the Court OF Errors and Appeals on three
appeals from the Cour of Chancery, was
set down for argument today. The suit
involves the custody of the two children,
of Mrs. Mary Kemble Slack, which Mrs.
Slack claimed as their mother, and Mrs.
Lewis Perrine by virtue of Mr.. Stacks
will making her their guardian.
The case has led to a great deal of liti-
cation between the parties in the Wash
ington courts, the New Jersey courts and
the United States Supreme Court, and
the various developments in it have fol-
lowed SO rapidly, and haye been so COM
plicated, that it has been difficult to keep
pace with them. Prominent couns have
represented both sides throughout, and
between them has developed one of the
keenest legal fights of the kind on re-
cord.
Yesterday one phase of the suit was
decided in Washington. when the SUI
preme Court of the United States rem
dered an opinion sustaining the Court
Of Appeals decision awarding to Mrs.
Slack the custody of her children. While
this decision is in favor of Mrs. Slack
1t by no means disposes of the case, as
counsel for Mrs. Perrine rely upon over
turning in the New Jersey Court of Err
rors n Appeals a decision in favor of
Mrs. Slack, and upon which they hold that
the Washington decision was based.
The application to the Supreme Court
OF the United States, which was decided
yesterday, was made by Colonel and Mrs.
Perrine, through their Washington law
yers to have the Supreme Court issue a
writ of supersedeas to set aside certain
order and proceedings-the awarding of
the children to Mrs. Slack in the Court
of Appeals of the District of Columbia.
The claim on the part of the Perrines
in the supreme Court was that a writ of
error had been taken, carrying the case
up from the Court of Appeals to the SUI
preme Court; that the writ of error had
been duly served and a bond of $40, 900
executed by the Perrines, with surety,
and approved by the Chief Justice of the
Court of Appeals, and hat thereupon,
was removed out of the jurisdiction of
the Court of Appeals to the Supreme
Court of the United States. 1t was
therefore, commended that the jurisdiction
of the Court of Appeals was at an end;
but that notwithstanding the taking out
of the writ of error, Mrs. Slack moved
the Court to direct that the custody of
the children be given to her. On June
0, after the issuing of the writ, the mo-
ton was granted, the Supreme Court re-
fusing the supersedeas.
The argument before the New Jersey
Court of Errors and Appeals was to be
opened today by Edwin r. Walker, of
counsel for Mrs. Slack: Mr.. Walker to
be followed by ex-Judge Chauncy H.
Beasley and r. ". Lindabury, counsel
for the Perrines, and the argument to
be closed by Cortlandt Parker, of counsel
for Mrs. Slack.
The appeal is made by Mrs. Slack, who
seeks to lave the Court set aside a de-
cision of he Chancellor, which set aside
one of his own decisions awarding the
custody of the children to Mrs. Slack
and declaring Mr.. and Mrs. Perrine in
contempt.