The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-05-04

|
Louis during the time of the worlds
exhibition in that city. The records
claim that in a lying in hospital in
that city little baby was born in the
month of February, 1904. The birth
was premature and the baby was
placed In an incubator exhibited on
the exposition grounds
MRS. Stella Barclay of Buffalo, N. Y,
became attached to the child, which
is SAID to have been born of Charlotte
Z. Bleakley and she at once com
menced an investigation as to the his
tory and parentage of the baby, with
views OF adopting it. A correspondence
between the mother of the child and
MRS. Barclay followed and from the
records it shows a most touching rela-
tionship between the two
me result of this correspondence
was the rellnquiShing of all claims to
the child by Charlotte Bleakley and
the adoption of the child by deed, for
maily executed by the mother and the
rather of Marian Bleakley The deed
was delivered to the exhibitor at the
fa1r and the child given to the Bar
clays.
Wants Child Back.
Inc barclays then moved to Moline,
H. ana TOOK the child with them,
Whefe they cared for it until May 90
I9g5, when Mrs. Bleakley commenced
hdpeas corpus proceeding in the cir
cunt court of Rock Island county
10 recover DOS
session of the child making the con-
tentlon that the deed of adoption was
Vold because it was not in conformity
with the laws of the state of Missouri
ana further claiming that it was OBJ
laineo through fraud and dureSs.
A trial in this court resulted in a
Judgment in favor of the mother for
possession of the child. The child was
then transferred from it's foster par
ents to its natural mother, Mrs.
Loft 81, nj
the Jurisdiction of the court she had
INVOKED and came to Lawrence, Kan.
on September 5, 1905, the Barclays
commenced proceedings in habeas
corpus in Douglas county to repossess
themselves of the child. This court
held that the deed of adoption was
valid and judgment was entered in
favor of the Barclays for possession
of little Marian BleakIey.
Before such order could be execut-
ed, however, Mrs. BIeakley fed the
jurisdiction of the court. Proceedings
in error were prosecuted from the
judgment there rendered, to the SUI
preme court of Kansas and the judg
ment of the district court of Doug
las county was reversed on the
grounds that the judgment of the IL
linois court was final, conclusive and
binding.
Reverses Circuit Court.
Then the judgment in the Rock Is
for review in the court of appeals of
that state. The court of appeals re-
versed the judgment of the circuit
court of Rock Island county on the
grounds that the adoption papers in
Missouri were valid and binding.
This order did not give the Bar
clays possession of the child because
Mrs. Bleakley had left Illinois and was
in Kansas and the court had lost con-
troll over it. Thus Mr. and Mrs. Bar
clay rely on rhe decision of the court
of appeals of The state Of Illinois as a
final adjudication of the validity of the
deed. On the contrary Mrs. Bleak1ey
and her mother, Mrs. Ora Thompson,
Kansas in their favor.
The above IL CLEANED from the court
proceedings. There We're many inter
esting happenings that have made the
fight of Mrs. B1eakley from Chautau-
qua county 70 the territory of Okla
homa to escape the Barclays and the
kidnapers. etatements from both
mothers of the child and.th fierce
clashes of some of the best attorneys
of the west have attracted interest to
the case.
Child Is Kidnapped.
On August ?, 1909, Marian Bleakley
was kidnapped from the home of Mrs.
Ora Thompson, 1928 Garfield avenue,
by unknown parties. The baby was
placed in an automobile near the st.
Francis hospital and taken as far as
Valley Falls along abandoned roads
and highways. Here the machine
broke down. The baby and it's kid
napers were transferred to a Missouri
Pacific train IT AtchisOn and Mrs. Bar
clay and Joseph N Gentry were ar
rested in Kansas City in possession of
the child.
The case was taken to Jackson
county on a change OF venue because
it was chrageG that newspaper articles
had prejudice the minds of persons in
this city who were likely to be chosen
as jurors.
Following is the list of persons who
will be called as witnesses:
A. J. Carruth, o. S. Perkins, S. ].
Henry, E. A. Hallock. D. H. H. Keith,
Ike Kingman, E. T. Barrett, William
Barrett, Stella Barclay, F. H. Tillot
son, D. T. Gregg, Lottie Bleakley, Mrs.
Ora Thompsoo Clarence BelIknap, ].
D. Norton, Ben JudkinS. NJ. l.. Stalker,
Mrs. Frank Burghart, F. S. Farney,
Oscar Swayze, Joe Ross, William Hut
ton, w. w. Wiley, Emil Barber, Robert
Lowe. w. c. Mclean, A. T. Lucas, w.
r. Thompson. NJ. A. Scott. Terry Stat
ford, John Sts;rns, Mrs. E. A. Hallock,
E. Anderson, w. H. Mackey, c. NJ.
Cloughley, w. C. Buoy, Charles NJ.
Ross, NJ. S. Atchison. Henry G. Asher,
w. E. Fitzgerald. Charles Armstrong,
John Green, L. H. TilIotson and ]. M.
Gentry.
Tn cIIRMIT DIFFERENCES