The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1910-06-25

Disposed 0f Aitss Leasthy Hesrins o.
Habeas Corpus Beiore Judee Ilocpcr

Habeas cerpas Before Judss Hsspw
The Circuit Court held special ses-
sion on Monday afternoon and ninht
and on Tuesday until $50 p. M, Judge
F B. Hopper presiding, to hear tes-
timony and argument in habeas corpus
proceedings brought BY Mrs. Mary E.
Pickering, Of Pawling, near Phoenix
vile, Chester county, Pa, to recover
custody OF her youngest daughter.
Susan f Teter, whom in August, 1907
she placed in charge Of Clifford Cook
and wife, then Of Elan, Chester county,
no wof the Zion section, in this county.
Messrs. w s. and Frank B. Evans
appeared for Mrs Pickering and
Messrs. w T. and Henry A. Warbur-
ton for the respondents 10 the petition.
Quite number Of witnesses were
heard on both sides, and the gist Of
their testimony was about as follows:
Mrs. Pickering's first husba1-, whose
name was Teter, died about seven
years ago, leaving her with four
daughters She found b )mes for three
OF them, and kept SUSIE, then about
four years old, with herself. She
worked for various parties, and in
August, 1907, for short time for the
Cooks at Elan, Lancaster county. She
got more wages at another place, and
thought it would be better to get
home for Susie. She asked Mrs. Cook
who was a Miss England, of Zion.
and later Mrs Mearns, before her
marriage to Mr. Cook, to take Susie.
Mrs. Cook demurred. but finally
agreed to do so, provided. as she
claimed was agreed upon, that she
should have charge OF her until she
reached I8 years Of age. Mrs Pick
ering toward the end of August, 1907,
went to Oxford to keep house for the
father of her present husband Frank
Pickering, to whom she was married
IN Lancaster after his fathers death,
Later she and her husband moved TO
the nighborhood of Wilmington, where
two of her daughters joined them for
a time. finally finding places in VIII
mlngton, the elder now FL years old, at
housework, and the other, II years old
as clerk in grocery store. II was
alleged that the mother did not know
their present whereabouts, but they
appeared in Court and spoke for them
selves Efforts were made to dis
credit Mrs. Pickering's moral charac-
ter, based mostly on countryside gos-
sip, but nothing definite was establish
ed. Similar rumers that Mr., Cook
had cruelty beaten a boy obtained
from an Aid Society and also one of
ms step-daughters, who nterfered.
were told of, but Mr.. Cook fatty de-
med ever having such boy IN his
charge or that he had ever chastised
any OF his daughters. 1t was ad-
mitted that Mrs. Pickering's husband
had served term in prison, when 4
young man, for receiving stolen
horses. but witnesses testified that he
had reformed and was now well-to-do
and of good repute.
lhe Pickerlngs now live on farm
OF 30 acres at Pawling, near Phoenix
vile, to which rney moved last May.
On May 8 Mrs. Pickering visited Mrs.
Cook and said she wished to tske
Susie back, as she could now pro, ide
Tor her properly. Mr. Cook said that
his wife could not detain Susie as no
papers had been signed. Mrs. Cook
testified that it was finally agreed that
Susie should go with her mother for
ten days or two weeks. Mrs. Picker
ing was called to Lancaster, where she
had brought suit against the estate
OF former employer for back wages.
and left Susie with neighbor, a Mrs.
Burns In her absence Mr. Cook and
Justice Thompson Hudson, OF H6beY
well, located Susie. Habeas Corpus
proceedings were brought at West
Chester, and Susie was given again to
the custody of Mr.. and MRS. Cook.
Mrs. Pickering later applied to the
Cecil Court for another writ of habeas
corpus. which was issued by Chief
Judge Pearce and heard by Judge
Hopper The finding at West Ches-
ter was embodied in Mr.. Cooks an
swer to Mrs. Pickering's petition. but
1t did not bind the Court here. and.
besides, the case as tried there was
largely one-sided After heariny a
lengthy argument and an eloquent plea
from Mr., W. S. Evans, Judge Hopper
dismissed the petition and remanded
Susie to the custody of MIR. and Mrs.
Cook
His Honor said that Mr. and Mrs.
Cook had rightfully obtained CUSTODY
of the child and their detention of her
was equally rightful Under the law
OF Maryland the sole question he had
to consider was which would be best
Tor the interest of the chiid-to give
her back to her mother or leave her
with Mr., and Mrs Cook. OF the two
environments i'll which she might be
placed that offered by her present
home was the better. The problem
had occupied his thoughts throughout
the hearing, his Honor said, and what
1t had cost his feelings TO solve It as
he did nobody but himself could know.
If the mother lived here and had the
custody OF the child he would not
separate them, but he would not send
the child beyond the jurisdiction Oh
this Court. Ii ii should hereafter AZ
pear that he had erred his error coull
be corrected The child would be re
garded as a ward OF the Court. and her
mother would be privileged to visit
her at her pleasure. Judge Hopper
took occasion to say that there was
not the shadow OF proof to impair
Mrs pickeriup's moral cboroc+e- -.