The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1898-03-08
PROBATE COURT DECISION
GIVEN BY JUDGE CLEAYELAND ON
THE APPOINTMENT0 or GUARDIAN.


huence Case.
In the probate court, yesterday,
Judge Livingston w. Cleaveland gave
decision in the matter of the applica-
ton of guardian for George Alfred
King, in which he holds that the
mother is the natural guardian Of the
child after the death of the father. The
decision, which is of wide interest, is
given here in full:
Probate court, district of New Ha-
ven, S., March I, 1893.
In the matter of the application for
the appointment of a guardian for
George Alfred King of New Haven, In
said district, a minor.
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.
This is an application brought by
father of George Alfred King, a seven
year-old minor for his appointment as
the guardian of this minor, the childs
father having died in 1895 and his
mother In 1897. The maternal grand
parents, Mr.. and Mrs. Harlan p.
Adams, object to such appointment and
ask for the appointment of their
daughter, Mrs. Henry Grace, the child s
maternal aunt.
1t has been suggested that the mo-
tives actuating the respective appli-
cants for the guardianship Of this boy
have been largely concern for his re-
ligious training, the mother and the
maternal relatives being of different
religious creed from that Of the father
and the paternal relatives, but as the
constitution of this state provides that
no preference shall be given by law to
any religious sect or mode of worship,
and it is admitted that the child will
be religiously brought UP whichever
relative is awarded the guardianship,
religious considerations may be wholly
eliminated from the decision Of this
I case.
There was no dispute at the hearing
| as to the material facts. 1t Is admitted
| that the relative on either side Is a
proper person to be appointed guar
| dian, and while the child at the hear
! Ing, in response to an inquiry, express
| ed a desire 70 have his maternal aunt
| for his guardian, yet he also exhibited
evidence of affection for his paternal
| grandparents.
| For a month prior to the death OF
the boys father, James King, George
and his younger sister and brother
with their father and mother, had re-
| sided in the same house with his mo-
Tiers parents, but in different apart
| ments. For some two years after his
| fathers death he and the rest of the
| family lived in the same apartments
| with the mothers parents, being sup
| ported in part by the proceeds of in
surance on his fathers life, and in part
| by his mothers father. For the past
| four years George has been in the habit
of making his paternal grandparents
| visits OF month or so at a time, and
while his mother was absent from New
| Haven on account of falling health, in
the spring and summer of 1897, he re
manned with them for six or, sever
| weeks, but upon his mothers return tt
her parents he, at his mothers request
left his paternal grandparents, to bt
cared for, ever since, by his mothers
| sister, Mrs. Grace, who, with her hus
band, lives In the same house, but no
in the same apartments with Mr.. and
Mrs. Adams Ruth, the younger sistel
of George, lives with Mrs. Rawson {
sister of Mrs. King and Mrs. Grace
and Jimmie, younger brother, is car
ed for by the Adams family. The ap
plication, however, only relates to thu
boy George No guardian over Georg
or the other children, SO far as ap
peared In evidence was ever appointed
by any court, nor did father or mother
by will, appoint any testamentar.
guardian over them. The father, befor
his death, expressed desire to hav
George brought up by his family, ant
the mother, before her death, expressed
deesire to have him brought up b.
hers The paternal relatives ask tina
the fathers wishes be respected. an,
the mothers relatives ask us to respec
, hers.
The questions for decision are:
First Should the wishes of the mex
!! of kin on the paterhal side prevail owe
those on the maternal?
Second. Should the wishes of tn
father, who died more than two year
before the mother, prevail over tn
wishes of the mother?
In the case of In Re Turner G. 70
Green IN. J), 43S, case singularly
parallel to the case under considera
ton, 1t was held that the parental kir
are not entitled to any preference or
that account over the maternal. tina
both stand on the same footing, ant
that case seems to illustrate the com
mon law on that subject.
In support of the claim that thu
wishes of the father should control owe
those OF the mother 1t was contendet
that the mother, if living, could no
claim the guardianship of this child
absolutely. This claim has led thu
court to examine with some care tn,
original statutes of our state relating
to the appointment of guardians ant
the decisions of our highest court con
STRUNG those statutes, and the con
clusion of this court is that, whateve
may have been the law in this stat,
before the word parent wa
substituted for father in certain o
those statutes, the law prevailing ii
most of the states is to-day the law o
Connecticut-that the mother become
the natural guardian of her mino
children upon the death of the fathe
(Woerner's American Law of Guar
dianship, Secs. Z, 10, 81. Matthewsol
VS.. Perry, 81 Conn.,, 435). Hence in tn
opinion of this court George ALFRED
Kings mother, who survived his ia
Their for more than two years, wa
during that period his natural guar
dian and entitled to his custody.
1t appears that the child was place.