The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1900-11-29
THE DEM URRERS OVERRULED
IETHE CASEOF NETTIE L. SHIPM4N
AGAINST 4. n. ROCKWELL.

AGAINST Il, n. ROCK WE'LL.
A Suit for the Custody of Minor Chill
dren which Has Attracted Much
Tnterest-PIaintIT and Defendant
but Were Divorced and Each Married
Again Judge Robinson's Memoran-
dunn.
In the superior court, civil side, yes
terday afternoon Judge Robinson over
ruled a demurrer to the complaint in
the case of Nettie l.. Shipman of this
city against Albert f. Rockwell of Bris-
toll case which has attracted consid-
cradle attention about the state. The
plaintiff and defendant were formerly
husband and wife. few years ago
they entered into mutual articles of sep
aration, by the terms of which the de-
PENDANT was to pay for the support of
their two children. After the separa-
ton the defendant obtained a divorce
from the plaintiff.
In the complaint it is alleged that now
the defendant refuses to pay for the
support of the children unless they are
given into his custody, and that he con-
templates taking them from the plain
tiff. The plaintiff asked for a Temporal
ny injunction restraining the defendant
from taking the children from the plain
tiff and for a decree compelling the de-
PENDANT to pay $50 per month for the
support of the two children The tenn
porary injunction was granted.
Then the defendant demurred to the
complaint and it is this demurrer which
has just been overruled. All the de-
murrers, several in number, are over
ruled, and Judge Robinson in the men,
orandum of his decision says that some
of the demurrers reach to the entire
complaint, some to the several prayers
for relief, some to particular paragraphs
and some to parts of paragraphs. The
latter class are overruled because the
court knows Of no rule or practice
which permits a part of a paragraph to
De singled out IOr demurrer.
AS to those demurrers which go to the
entire complaint and the prayers for re-
lief, the court thinks that many, if not
all, of the questions raised thereby may
be just as satisfactorily disposed of up
on the hearing of the entire cause as
upon demurrer. The court further
doubts the propriety or justice of the
court passing upon a question involv |
ing the custody and consequently the |
welfare of minoA children as a simple |
question of law. 1t seems to the court !
that such welfare can be best assured
by thorough investigation and inquiry |
by the court as to the children, their |
ages, appearances, health, dispositions, |
peculiarities and preferences, and the |
character tempers and habits of the |
persons contending for such custody, |
their situations and conditions in life, !
their home surroundings, the inmates
of their households and the kind of as
eociates and surroundings that the chill
dren would be thrown among should
the custody be given to either of the
contending parties.
The memorandum further contains
the following: when the controversy
is between parents over the custody of |
children of tender years, parents who
have voluntarily separated or been sep
arated by a decree of divorce-when\a
difference of views has arisen between
such parents as to such custody, and
this plainly appears to the court, the
court ought not to permit the children's
interests to suffer or go unprotected,
even if the application for relief does
not set forth every possible controlling
factor or the strongest and most decis-
i've reasons for such controversy"
Further the judge says that the
watchful policy of our law should be,
and he believes is, not to permit the
continuance of such controversies at the
expense of the interests of the children,
or to allow such contentious to so unin- ]
vestigated when it's attention is plainly
called to them When the interests of {
such children are at stake the judge {
does not think that the court should be {
astute to find reasons for throwing out
of court the request for its aid. '
In conclusion the memorandum is as {
follows: 81 am of the opinion that
cannot consistently with the policy t
heretofore referred to, say, or under !
take to say, that, admitting all the allie ]
cations in the complaint to be true, this {
mother plaintiff has set up therein no t
sufficient reason for the kind of inter c
vention which she asks at the hands of t
this court
OBTTUARY NOTES. \