The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1901-02-02
Court Refuses to Give Mrs.
Allen Custedy Of Hsr Sons.
OlScoRO IN WEALTHY FAMILY.
Husband and Eldest Sen Auayst Against
Wife and Neither 10 Legal Struggle Mrs.
Allen Alleged 10 b IAtsmpsratA

New York. Feb e,--whiteiaw Reid AL
Ten and George Walton Holker Allen.
two bright eyed intelligent looking boys.
eleven and nine years OF age. whose Gus
tody is sought by their mother. Lydia J.
NJ. Allen, the wife of George w. Allen.
formerly mayor OF ST. Louis. who charges
that they were abducted from her by
their elder brother, Thomas Allen. third.
q lawyer. of this city, twsntysthree
years OF age. a graduate OF Yale, were
produced before Judge Dugro. OF the
Supreme court yesterday. ip obedfspce
10 writ of hsbess corpus.
Final action on the writ was postponed.
and the boys remain with their elder
brother for the present
Mrs. Allen was social leader in st.
Louis, where the Aliens have long been
wealthy and prominent. A few years ago
the family moved TO Princeton. n. j.,
having purchased a residence opposite
that of former President Grover Cleve-
land with Whose family the Aliens are
intimate.
Mrs Allen Is temporarily stopping at
the Fifth Avenue hotel. Her husband Is
al present at the Southern hotel, ST..
Louis,
IL was upon his authority and direc-
tion that his son Thomas Allen. third,
took the little fellows from their home
in Princeton and brought them 10 this
city while their mother was absent on
business trip To boston. Mr. Allen
h.t l.
use OF liquor, which Eas causes all the
trouble. She says this is not true.
MOTHER DENIED THE CHILDREN.
Although Mrs. Aliens counsel made
strong appeal 10 place the BOYS I'm her
custody until the question could he def
nitely determined. Judge Dugro declined
the remove them fromAt the care OF their
brother. who promised 10 produce them
In court on Monday next. The father Is
expected TO be present at that time TO
defend his right 10 the custody of his
sons.
Professor Charles r. Bostwick. OF the
New York University Law school. and
Thon1as Debeyoise. counsel for the broth
er Of IN boys. had prepared return TO
the writ. setting forth many incidents
In the III of Mrs. Allen In show that she
should not have the care of the child
rem, Nut they refrained from filing the
paper or making ~ public. for the rea-
son. that they considered it's publication
might in1urc the future lives and happi
ness OF the boys They also hoped that
IN the meantime the difficult might be
amicably settled and all fun ier litiga-
tion stopped.
When Mrs Allen saw her little boys IN
Z court yesterday, for the first time In
several weeks, she kissed them sffec-
tiohately. They returned her embraces
and cried as she talked To them. Mornay
Williams, her counsel, insisted that they
should he returned to her at once. sas
they had been taken from her without
authority.
He characterizes the request that the
boys be permitted to remain with their
brother as a most bare-faced proposition
FATHER TO DEFEND ACTION
Professor Bostwick said he wanted the
hearing adjourned until he had an cp-
portunitl 10 hear from their father. He
declared Mrs. Allen had been an habit
ual drunkard for years, and when she
left her home on January ~. she did not
intend TO return. lie said she had left
her husbands home. and he feared n
the boys were again placed In her Gus
tody they would be taken out of the jur-
isdiction of the court.
Mr. Williams protested against these
statements, and said that the fathers
action I'm even temporarily assigning his
rights in the boys 90 hts eldest son was
prepos ferrous The right of possession
was obtained unlawfully by an abduction.
he declared.
Judge Dugro hinted that there were
circumstances under which even a strang-
er might have right 10 take children
from their mother-although he will not
say that was the condition here-but the
father would have such a right under
some circumstances.
MIR Williams disputed such a conten-
tion. and urged that the father and moth
er had an equal right TO children. Even
the fathers direction would not give any
other person the right TO take the child
rcn from their mother.
Judge Dugro. however, asserted that
anyone obeyinx such n direction from the
father Was justified I'm what he did. He
refused TO direct the return Of the child
rem 10 their mother pending the final de-
termination of the case.