The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1916-04-24

the status OF the child as Thaw's prospec
tive heir were not materially Injuries
by this testimony, direct and downright
as it was, is point of tremendous inter
est to the legal fraternity. The pater-
nifty of the little boy, absolutely repudi.
ated by Thaw when he testified in the
divorce hearing before Judge Cohen in
/ the common pleas court and attributed
to Patrick t"Jack') Francis by three
witnesses, was not necessarily the COM
polling factor in the granting of de-
cree on April 10, but it was most i'm
/ portant feature of the case. To the mind
of the laymen, IMMERSED in the peculari-
ties of the law of this state, the testi-
/ mony might have seemed to remove for
ever any possible chance the boy Russell
Thaw's fortune.
Lawyers, however, do not look at the
matter that way. They seem fairly well
agreed that the divorce suit testimony,
positive as it was, actually accomplished
nothing SO far as inheritance rights UNI
der the laws of Pennsylvania are con-
cerned.
Child's Rights Guarded by Law.
Even though Harry X. Thaw himself
stated as definitely as words could ex
press his mind that he had never seen
Mrs. Thaw alone after the summer OF
1908 (the child was born, it appears, on
October rs, 1909, near Potsdam, Ger
many, and insisted under most thor
ough questioning about this point, that
he had never had an opportunity to be
alone with Mrs. Thaw while he was
confined in WATERMAN or while he was
being examined in various proceedings
outside of Matteawan, subsequent TO
the summer of 1905 many lawyers hold
that his statements do not, in them
selves, establish the illegitimacy of the
boy.
The legal status of the child, expressed
as simply as possible, is that he is pre-
sumed to be legitimate because under
laws all children born in
wedlock are presumed to be legitimate
even though the husband and wife were
living apart. As one lawyer expressed
it, the laws of this state give q child |
every possible presumption and put the
onus on the person legally presumed to
be the father to establish positively that
the paternity lies elsewhere.
Lawyers say that it will be necessary |
for Thaw, in case the situation develops /
some day, as seems probable, into a legal |
contest for the Thaw millions to prove
that the circumstances of his confine-
nent in Matteawan and the rigor with
which he was guarded elsewhere made
t possible for Harry Thaw to be alone
IT any time with Evelyn Nesbit Thaw.
The law places the burden of proof upon
rhaw. One lawyer thoroughly acquaint
ID with all the facts gives it as his be
ief that this cannot be done.
Thaw is forbidden under his fathers
will to dispose Of his estate or of any
,art of it. The will stipulates that none
# the children of the elder Thaw was
o have disposing powers, and commands
hat at their death their estates must
% to their lawful issue.
The testimony given in the divorce
earng becomes, however, of great inn
ortance as foreshadowing, possibly, the
Material to be used against the child's
laims if will contest is ever brought,
5 seems inevitable. The transcript OF
he testimony given in the hearing was
to the Sun Saturday. Much :
+ it having to do with allegations of /,
lrs. Thaw's intimacy with various men, !,
lcluding the person named as the father /,
{ the boy, Patrick John Francis, need
OF be gone into. I