B REVIEW OF THE D'HAUTEVILLE CASE: RECENTLY ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN THE COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS, FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA. BY A MEMBER OF THE BOSTON BAR. REPRINTED FROM THE JANUARY NUMBER OF THE LAW REPORTER. BOSTON: WEEKS, JORDAN AND COMPANY. 1841. 124./2-133 Sec 5000.27.5 HARVARD COLLEGE LIBRARY 1851, dan. 5. of Boston ADVERTISEMENT. THE following article was prepared for the Law Reporter, a monthly Law Journal, published in Boston. Several professional gentlemen having expressed a desire that it might be presented in a form more accessible to the public at large, it is now re-printed. The writer desires to remark, that he was interrupted in the preparation of the article, by professional engagements; and in order to publish the magazine in its proper season, a greater part of these remarks were printed as they were written, without an opportunity for the careful revision, which was desirable. It is also proper to say, in relation to a report which has come to his ears, that the counsel of Mr d'Hauteville have no connection with this article, and never saw it, until after its publication. The manuscript was never seen by any person but the writer; and he alone is responsible for the opinions here advanced. BOSTON, JANUARY 8, 1841. P. W. C. Entered according to an Act of Congress, in the year 1811, by WEEKS, JORDAN & Co., in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of Massachusetts. REVIEW OF THE D'HAUTE VILLE CASE:* AT the July term of the court of general sessions for the city and county of Philadelphia, a writ of habeas corpus was issued at the instance of Paul Daniel Gonzalve Grand d'Hauteville, directed to Ellen, his wife, and to David and Miriam C. Sears, her parents, commanding them to have before the court the body of Frederick, the infant son of the petitioner and the said Ellen. In the petition upon which the writ was issued, Mr d'Hauteville set forth that he was a citizen of the Canton de Vaud, in Switzerland; and that he was married in the church of Montreux, in the said canton, and according to its laws, on the 22d of August, 1837, to Ellen Sears, whose father was then a citizen of Massachusetts, in the United States. That in the early part of 1838, his wife, with his consent, came to Boston on a temporary visit; and has since, without any just cause known to the petitioner, refused to return to him, or has been prevented from doing so, and that on the 27th of September following, she gave birth to the child whose custody he now claims. Mr d'Hauteville adds, that he arrived in the United States in July, 1839, and has ever since been engaged in a fruitless attempt to recover his wife and child, the latter of whom has been restrained of its liberty by its mother and her parents, and detained by them in this country against his consent and permission. To the writ of habeas corpus, Mr and Mrs Sears severally returned, that the said child was not in their custody, which they did not claim, and never had claimed. That the child and its mother were, and for some time had been living with them, or one of them, for comfort and protection, which she (their daughter) entirely merited, and would continue to receive, while it should be in their power to give it. Mrs d'Hauteville made return, that she was possessed of the custody * REPORT OF THe d'Hauteville CASE-The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, at the suggestion of Paul Daniel Gonzalve Grand d'Hauteville, versus David Sears, Miriam C. Sears, and Ellen Sears Grand d'Hauteville. Habeas corpus for the custody of an infant child. Philadelphia: Printed by William S. Martien. 1840. |