THE CASE OF ALICE M. M. CLARK.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume V, Issue 258, 12 April 1878, Page 11

THE CASE OF ALICE M. M. CLARK.

Judging from an article in the Daily Times, the case of the girl Alice Clark, 'which was recently before the Supreme Court, is not unlikely to lead to a good deal of misconception on the part of those who like their opinion at second-hand, or who are led away by the sensational aspect of the circumstances disclosed, and the spice of religious intolerance invidiously attempted to be introduced. "We shall not be surprised to hear soon that this is another " Mortara" affair, and ,hat the child has been kidnapped with a view to her forcible conversion to the Catholic faith . The facts disclosed in the affidavits are, however, of a very different character, and show conclusively that,, if there has been any attempt at proselytism it has heen on the part of the Protestant half-brother, who, knowing that his sister had been baptised and brought up in the Church of Rome, acknowledges that he kept her away while under his. charge from its ministers and services. The circumstances which led to the proceedings in Court are really, very simple. It would appear that, although, the will of the mother Mrs. Clark was proved, a codicil, whether valid or riot, in law is outside the question, was never exhibited, nor did the executors make any application to the Judge for direction.as to the personal guardianship of the children, a course which was clearly necessary under the peculiar terms of the testament, even without taking into consideration the definte wishes of the. executrix expressed in the codicil. "With the full consent of the executors, it appears that Father Larkin took charge, of the children upon their mother's death, and distributed them among certain relatives and friends, consigning Alice Maud to the care of Mr. Clark, at Clyde, upon the distinct understanding, the Father swears, that she was to be brought. up in the Catholic faith. Mr. Clark contra-

diets this, but the presumption is strongly in favour that a priest so confiding a child should insist upon such an arrangement. It is important to notice that, with regard to the other five children, no attempt has ever been made by Mr. Clark to obtain or exercise personal guardianship or direction, and have himself or the other executors in whom guardianship is nominally vested in any way interfere with their being educated in the faith of their mother. In November last, the two eldest girls were staying upon a visit with the housekeeper of Father Walsh, at Ophir, and naturally enough visited Clyde ; and subsequently, Father Larkin, being in the district, took a drive over to spend a few days at Ophir. During this visit, the Rev. Father states that he discovered that the child was not being brought up in the Catholic religion, and he therefore decided to remove her from the care of her halfbrother, and place her where the wishes of her parents would be observed — and this determination he at once intimated to Mr. Clark. The latter gentleman, according to his own account, drove over to fetch Alice home, and " entering " Father Walsh's house, "led her out and placed her in the buggy." This course, which from other circumstances not substantially deposed to, seemed to certain bystanders somewhat in the nature of an abduction was resented by them, and with some show of reason in. the absence of the master of the house, and, we may presume, although it is not definitely stated, the unwillingness of the girl to go. Eventually Alice was conveyed to the care of a respectable family in Dunedin, with whom she is now staying, and attending the Convent School. Mr. Clark moved tbe (Supreme Court in its " common law and statutory jurisdiction " for a writ of habeas corpus, and was defeated upon the ground that he had failed to make out a legal title to the custody of the child, and that the Court was not satisfied that she had been removed from his custody by " fraud or violence." It would appear to us that a good deal of time and money have been wasted, and that the plain straightforward course for Mr. Clark to have pursued if he desired the personal guardianship of the children, for it is clear lie could not assume or ask for that of one of them separately, was to have applied to the Court in its probate jurisdiction to give " directions of guardianship," which would include, we presume, instructions as to their religious education. The endeavour to excite sectarian animosity in the matter will, we trust, fail. As we before stated, the attempt at proselytism, if any, was evidently in this instance on the part of the Protestant half-brother, and not the Roman Catholic priest.