Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1910-02-18
Deed Not Effective.

From these considerations it follows
that the rights Of the children and their
mother, the petitioner, are unaffected
| by the deed from B. R. Tillman, Jr.,
to the respondents; and hence the duty
| devolves upon the court to determine
whether the custody Of the children
| should be awarded to the petitioner,
their mother, or to the respondents,
their grandparents. No claim Is made
| by the father to the custody Of his
children, on the contrary, in his deed
to the respondents, he expressly states,
as one Of the reasons for making It,
that he did not wish to undertake the
responsibilities Of rearing them.
The issue then Is between the petit
toner, in the maternal rights and the
paternal grandfather and grandmoth-
er, claiming under a deed from the
father and alleging the mother to be
unfit to be entrusted with the rearing
of the children.
In the decision of this issue, the
court should give great, If not con-
elusive force to the wishes of the faith
er expressed in the deed entrusting the
custody Of his children to another fit
ted to rear them, If the family rela-
ton was broken not by mis- own fault,
but by the fault or incompetence Of
the mother. On the other hand, if the
family relation was broken by the TAX
ing of the children from the mother
and bestowing them on the respond
ents against her protest, when there
was not on her part such improper con-
duct or incompetency as to constitute
just reason for such extreme action,
then the execution Of the deed and the
taking away Of the children could not
be recognized, other than acts in them
Il ~, s~l. Co.. nnrfc oh
legation to both mother and children
as to call for the interference of the
court in their behalf This, we think,
presents the ultimate issue in the con-
troversy. The version of the petitioner
mas been already set out.
Mrs. Tillman's Character.
The respondents, in their return,
make the general charges that the pc
titioner has always been disrespectful
toward her husband and implacable in
her dislike to his family, and they
show that this dislike extended to un-
becoming expressions of her antipathy
in letter to her husband, they express
the opinion that the former intemper-
ate habits of the husband were due to
his unhappy marriage. In support Of
their claim that the deed was justified
and that they should retain the GUS
tody Of the children, they introduced
an affidavit of B. r. Tillman, Jr, in
tended to show the petitioners unfit
ness to have charge of her children.
In this affidavit, B. r. Tillman, Jr.
admits the faults attributed to him by
his wife, their separation, his own con-
tradiction and their consequent recon-
ciliation, averring, however, that he
has entirely given up the use of intox-
icants. He says that he was con-
strained to give the custody of mis- chill
dren to his father and mother, because
of the unfitness Of his wife to rear
them, in that she was selfish, had
taught his children to hate his family,
was arrogant towards him, showing a
disposition to consider him and mis-
family antagonistic to her and in that
she had very little education and Had
expressed ideas upon the most sacred
relations of life which were absolutely
contrary to the best interests of any
home, and under which no child could
be properly raised"
He further AYERS that he sent the
children away with his mother after
his wife had angrily refused permis-
sion that they should go and remain
until she had recovered her strength
after the illness from which she was
suffering. His account Of the sepa-
ration conflicts with that of the petit
toner in that he AYERS that. after he
had sent the children away without her