The Kidnapping of the Kerr Child: A Battle for Custody and Morality

THAT KIDNAPING.

The kidnapping of the infant daughter of the late Charles L. Kerr, from the steamboat by E.A. Thorndyke and Viola Bell Thorndyke, was won yesterday. Kerr made an application for a writ of habeas corpus for the 'Cherry' [Kerr] daughter now in the custody of Mr. & Mrs. Ames, who had taken the children into his family with the intention of adopting them.

Mr. Ames filed a reply to the application, which places Thorndyke and Kerr, and the latter's divorced wife, who is now married to Thorndyke, in a very bad light. Mrs. Mae Medae, matron of the orphans' home, also filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus for the child kidnapped from the boat.

The Ames state that they have been holding L. Kerr, an infant, in their custody and expose their claim on the following terms: When Kerr obtained a divorce from his wife, he was awarded the custody of the children by the court. He placed them in the orphans' home and for a few weeks contributed partially to their support, but since January of the present year he has entirely failed to contribute anything to their support, but left them entirely to the charge of managers.

On the strength of the following letter they took the children away:

"Puyallup, March 14, 1902. Mrs. John Leary, Seattle, — I received yours of the 11th, and would say in reply that I am quite willing to adopt the children, provided you can find them such a home as you mention, but I would not like to adopt them to people that had children of their own. However, I will leave it to you to find them good, respectable homes. You can let the parties have the children and I will sign the adoption papers if I come up, if that will be satisfactory. Yours respectfully, C.L. Kerr."

The reply further states that Mr. & Mrs. Ames have had the custody of the child ever since the receipt of the letter. They have since had the responsibility of her guardianship and education and are anxious and willing to continue so to do until the child shall have reached her majority; that they have become deeply attached to the child and she to them; that they are proper and just persons to have the care, companionship and education of the child, while Kerr is not the proper person, that he is not willing to educate her and has no paternal regard for her; that the welfare of the child has been lost for a long time and is now out of his hands.

The Ameses also allege that Kerr and his wife have been known to maintaining a house of ill fame, that the said and her husband, E.A. Thorndyke, have colluded and conspired together to obtain possession of the child and place her in the custody of her mother, under whose control she would be reared in a brothel, and in time come to the 'dagger's edge.'

Kerr and Thorndyke called at the Police Court last evening and stated that they wished to correct some statements in relation to the matter. Thorndyke did the most of the talking and was corroborated by Kerr. The gist of their statement was that Kerr had paid over $100 for the support of the children at the home and hurt the receipts taken for it. Although he denied that the men took the president of the society Thursday evening, he stated she would take the money and give them a receipt and the children; that they called again the following morning, but she refused to see them.

The Ames ask that the child may not be taken from them, and that the writ be dismissed.