The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1916-02-29
RIGHTS OF MOTHER
GO OVER FATHERS
Justice Shearn Rules on Mrs.
Burton Lees Claim Upon
Two Children.
LAW or DARK AGES GONE

Modern principles OF law as to the
respective rights Of a husband and wife
TO the custody ~ their children were
laid down by Supreme Court Justice
Shcarn yesterday In deciding that the
Rev. Burton Howard Lee, rector of st.
Mary's Protestant Episcopal Church. Os-
shining. and assistant chaplain Of Sing
Sing. mus, surrender to his wife his
~four-ycar-old son, Templeton.
TIL case cam before Justice Slicarn
on a complaint by Mrs. Lee that her
husband had refused TO abide by the
terms OF an agreement by which the boy
Templeton and his brother. Burton. Jr.
we're to live with cach parent at inter-
walls for an cqual length Of time. The
father was to remain in Ossinins. and
Mrs. Lee agreed 20 live with her mother
no, more than thirty-nine miles from
New lorh. Tcmpleton went to visit his
father. but when .he time for the visit
had expired tho father refused 10 permit
the boy 10 return to his mother. Mrs.
Lee then vent to law. The father raised
lil' SuTpT IS''fE utltttt NudN tN'E ~ NV
did sign the agreement In question he
had a cuInmou law right TO the custody
of his boy and couldn't Sign 1t away.
In his decision Justice shear said.
III is claimed hat a father has a
Paramount right TO the custody OF a
child. This was once the Law. but we
have emerged from the dark ages during
which married Women had the status Of
slaves and ChattclS. The only basis OF
the fathers alleged superior right to-day
IL his Obligation, TO supper has children.
THIS bass disappears when one considers
what "a mother gives to her children in
suffering. -"if-Sacraflce and devotion.
on any admcasurement OF rights deter
mined h. service rendered. the right of
n mnthe" 10 the custody " her children
Is ut least equal to that of tho father.
The real test should ne the welfare ot
tN" child"
Justice Shearn says that the separa-
ton agreement signed 10y the Lees. which
avoided airing their troubles Tn court.
was FAN AMI proper and had the dp-
Iroysl pf . supreme court Justice. Mrs
Lee agreed To a reduction of Ncr alimony
from $50 to <l2 and consented 20 permit
one Of her children 10 bc with his father
all the time. The court pointed OF, tdat
the Rev, MI. Lees contention that his
a. a father wer" pdiaInouIt and
couldn't Ice lcsseucd by ANY agreement
he might make was decided in i>i. in
"A case IN which the cuur, decided that
the lathe could no; by agreement allen
ate his w.fc'a right 10 the custody Of
thc.r children.
In determining whether SIC case IN
question. Barry ". Norceiu. has any
tnding fore" to-day Justice She,rn said {:
We must have regard for tn. changed
status OF - wife IN THO .yes o. The law
to-dir a. compared with lSt2." and he
quoted the following from the opinion in
the Mnrceil case g. .~virg q" wi:o's
status IN those hays:
"1he yer. bong ami legal existence OF
= Wonin a. suspended during marriage.
o.. q; least. Is separated and consolidated
into ihs' q; her husband. Tnei" relative
roucr ove.the person ~ Their child FOL.
lows 'u Consequence. \ man cannot
grant artthine 20 his vie or enter into
n covenant with ucr. for TIC grant would
~" TO Suppos" her Seutrate existence 4:
and to covenant with her would h. only
IN covenant with himself. J dcnv that
'c had. Therefore. IN" right still further
10 violate this duty hv selling Ms chill
nrei. nr to part win their c~tAtriy."
Justice Shcdrn then remarks that "th"
world has moved since '>i2." lie does
not believe that any "-ullghtencd" couri
could subscribe 10 the statement that
1.-THE very being and lcgal existence
Of woman Is suspended during mar
rage" H.. adds that hy statute and
judicial decision u Wit" - now permitted
to contract with the freedom Of - single
woman hri b. TN, cypress consent of the
Legislator" She can contract with her
husband az Il Unmarried. EXCEPT that
they cannot alter or dissolve the mar
RAG" and sh. ,auuo' r-l.as" him from
LIS pbllguttul tn SuDnsrt her