The Whereabouts of little Ray Elliott of Marengo is still a mystery.
Yesterday the people of Marengo became convinced that the little fellow had been drowned. The river was thoroughly dragged and the mill race was drained was drained [sic] but he could not be found.
The gypsy party in the vicinity of Belle Plaine was overtaken but the little boy was not with them
To-day the news reached Marengo that there was a little boy with a gypsy party which passed through Homestead. A party has set out from Marengo for Homestead. A telephone message from Marengo to this city asks the people of Iowa City to watch for the stolen boy.
The police of Waterloo think that Ray Elliott passed through that city. The Waterloo Courier refers to a peculiar circumstance in the following language:
"Saturday morning a young woman arrived from the south with a babe and a little boy. The boy bears the description received by the officers exactly. The woman went to Jesup Saturday morning, or claimed to, and drove back in the afternoon. She had the boy alone when she returned. That night she took the train for Washburn, and Sunday afternoon she again drove back to this city. Monday morning she sent the boy north on the branch and that evening she took the train south on the B. C. R. & N. The officers believe that the boy she had with her is unquestionably the missing child."
Official notice has been received from Marengo's marshal offering $100 reward for the return of the little fellow to his parents.
He has blue eyes, white hair, cut short, light complexion, considerably freckled, and when last seen wore a gray dress, black plush cap, shoes out at the toes. from threats made it is suspected he was carried away by some horse traders or so-called gypsies camped near the city on the day of disappearance. All officers and others are requested to be on the lookout and make search among these people. The parents are almost distracted and deep gloom pervades the community. Any information may be sent to the mayor of Marengo. All state papers please copy.
The Mt. Vernon farmers did not find young Ray Elliott with the gipsies [sic] as they confidently expected to. The wanderers were caught up with at Clinton and the Bugle says of the affair:
"Two gentlemen from near Mt. Vernon were here this morning looking for a boy supposed to have been carried off by the gipsies. It appears that a few days ago one of a band of gipsies encamped near Mt. Vernon was arrested and fined for being drunk and he forthwith swore vengeance on the people who had been instrumental in causing his arrest and the subsequent fine, and as the boy was missing they readily presumed that he was the one that did it. Night before last two gipsies came in from Mt. Vernon or near there, and had a boy with them that was supposed to be the one kidnapped, and they got off the train and did not go east with the new conductor, and there being at this time a band of gipsies encamped near Mill creek, it was surmised that a visit out there might result in finding the boy, also the ones who had stolen him away, and a policeman was detailed to go out with them and investigate. From all questionings, however, nothing could be learned of the lost boy and they were let go. They are a hard looking gang.
A telephone message to this city this afternoon from Davenport states that a farmer, Mr. Morgan, living ten miles from that city, has seen the lost boy. A party left Davenport for the gipsy camp this afternoon, where the farmer said he saw the boy, who answers to the description given by the Marengo sheriff.
Sheriff Jones received a letter yesterday from E. E. Alverson, mayor of Marengo, thanking him and the authorities of the three cities for the business-like way in which the rumored clue to the lost Ray Elliott was run down. Mr. Alverson states that the boy was missed from home after 4:30 o'clock in the afternoon of the 12th, and that the surrounding country had been searched and the river dragged before the kidnapping idea was formed. The Davenport clue was about the last hope and now the parents are nearly crazy. They buried a small child but a week or so before the boy disappeared.
...
The parents of Ray Elliott of Marengo, the boy who is supposed to have been stolen by the gypsies, have lost another child by death on Saturday. It seems true that misfortunes never come singly.
...
--Ray Elliott, the 5-year-old boy who disappeared from his home in Marengo Friday afternoon, May 12, is still missing. It is quite certain that he was kidnapped by gypsies or other roving people. The parents are heartbroken over the loss of their little boy, and are unable to prosecute a vigorous search for him. Following is a description of the missing boy: He has white hair (cut short at the time of his disappearance), light complexion, blue eyes, face considerably freckled, and wore a gray dress, black plush cap and shoes out at toes. Knows his name well and will tell it if not intimidated by his abductors. Send any information to E. E. Alverson, mayor, Marengo, Iowa.
Miss Geneva Horne is making very encouraging progress soliciting funds to increase the reward for the finding of Ray Elliott, to $500. The money will be forwarded next Wednesday to the mayor of Marengo, who was given bond to return it in case the lost boy is not found. Persons desiring to subscribe to this worthy cause will find the paper at J. W. S. Horne's store. Fifty dollars has already been subscribed from this city, but Iowa City should send double that amount.
...
For the past two or three months the newspapers of Iowa have been publishing an item about a little boy named Ray Elliott, who was thought to have been taken from his home in Marengo by gypsies. Now it is reported that he was not stolen at all, but drowned, that his badly decomposed body was found in a rain barrel at the barn.
...
--A band of gypsies, who have been camping near Cedar Rapids have in their possession a boy about five years of age, who is supposed to be the missing Ray Elliott, of Marengo. In complexion and color of eyes and hair the child corresponds with the description, sent out by the Marengo authorities. He in no way resembles the other three little children traveling with these nomands[?]. They moved in a westerly direction a few days ago, the police authorities not being notified in time to intercept[?] them.
The parents of Ray Elliott, the young boy who so mysteriously disappeared from his home in Marengo several months ago, have given up all hope and it is probable his fate will never be known. It is surmised he was abducted, but there is no positive proof of this.
May 12, 1893, little Ray Elliott, aged 4 years, disappeared from his home in Marengo. The parents were distracted by his loss and made every effort to find him. Their neighbors, the townspeople of Marengo, aided them in their efforts. A reward of $500 was offered for his return. Sympathy for the distressed parents spread. A fund to prosecute the search was raised in this city by one of the savings banks. One Davenport lady contributed $100. The efforts for his recovery were fruitless. It was thought that he had been taken by a band of gypsies or horse traders, and the city police and the sheriff and his deputies looked through many a horse trader's outfit. Some were inspected in the city and others were pursued by the sheriff through the country. Although several children bearing some resemblance to the missing boy were hunted up, yet none of them proved to be the right one, and for the past six months practically nothing has been done toward prosecuting the search further, as the parents are very poor people, and the general public had made up their minds that the boy would never be found.
The second chapter of the story is told by the Waterloo correspondent of the Iowa Capital.
"On Friday, July 6, a woman claiming to live in Independence came to Waterloo accompanied by a little boy. She sought out Mrs. C. F. Hepler, who was at Cedar River park at the time, and said that she understood they wanted to adopt a boy, as they had lost their own. They could take the one she had with her, she said, and see how they liked him. She would return in a week and if Mr, and Mrs. Hepler were satisfied with the boy arrangements could then made to adopt him. The woman then left without giving any information in regard to the boy's parentage, and although more than a week has elapsed, she has not returned nor has anything been heard of her. Mrs. Hepler formerly lived near Marengo and as soon as she saw the boy she thought of the disappearance of little Ray Elliott, and suspected that the boy was he. She at once communicated her suspicious to the officers and when the woman who brought him there failed to show up at the time she agreed to, they began to investigate matters closely. The boy says he is 5 years old, which would correspond with Ray Elliott's present age. His name, he says, is Roy Burke, and he remembers having been in Canada and also in Marion, Ohio. He says he has a "good many mamas," and also tells of having been taken in a covered wagon with some folks who had a number of horses and ponies. The boy in most respects answers the description of the long lost Ray Elliott.
"The parents of Ray Elliott at Marengo have been communicated with and a photograph of the boy which was taken Monday was forwarded to them. This photograph resembles quite closely the picture of Ray Elliot which is in possession of the officers, although the latter is a wood cut and it is somewhat difficult to make an accurate comparison between it and a photograph.
"We are informed that the woman who brought the boy to Waterloo was poorly dressed and that she has not been seen here since so far as can be ascertained. The little boy talks very promptly and plainly in regard to himself, but doesn't remember having lived in Marengo. The circumstances surrounding the case cannot but arouse the suspicion that he has been stolen from some place, and if he is not the missing Ray Elliott, it appears that in some loving home there is an empty baby chair and that bleeding hearts are mourning his whereabouts. The lad will be taken good care of and the officers will do all in their power to find his home if such a thing is possible."
The end of the story is told by the wire from Marengo. Mrs. Elliott went to Waterloo, found that the child was indeed her lost boy and reached home with him at 6 o'clock last evening. The parents will find that the whole state rejoices with them in the recovery of little Ray. Here in Davenport, where the fund was raised and the search prosecuted with such vigor, there will be many hearts that will beat faster when the news of the wanderer's recovery is learned.
There has come a shade of doubt on the identity of the boy who was welcomed home to Marengo with so much rejoicing, as the lost Ray Elliott. A dispatch from Waterloo tells
[column 2]
of a new claim made to the boy. Reuben Good, son of J. W. Good, living at LaPorte City, says his mother was Mrs. Sarah Good, who is now the wife of David Lucas, a stone mason formerly of this city, but now living at Independence. Lucas is her third husband. He says that his mother adopted this boy from the poor house in Muscatine, when he was about six months old, and that he was the illegitimate son of a railroad man. His mother, he says, kept the boy about years [sic], and then his sister, who is known to many here as Bertha Good, took the boy, as Mrs. Good abused him. About this time Bertha married a man named Madison, in Adams county, but they did not live together very long. Something over a year ago she was married to a man named Tom Burke and they are now living in Marion, Ohio. On the Friday Fourth of July, this year, he says, his sister came from Ohio to Independence with the boy, where her mother is now living. On July 5, Mrs. Lucas, formerly Mrs. Good, got the child into her possession and he says he saw the boy get on the train coming west the next day, though he did not see Mrs. Lucas get aboard. Soon after his sister returned to Marion. Ohio, and he has a letter from her written after she got home, in which she said they had no clue to the boy, but that her husband would try to hunt him up.
The young man, Reuben Good, who tells this story, had with him two pictures, one of them being of Bertha Good, holding a little child in her arms. This was taken in LaPorte City when the child was about a year old. The other picture is Mrs. Burke with the boy standing beside her. This picture was taken Marion, Ohio, the latter part of April or the first of May.
This development makes the matter a very mysterious one, surely. The photograph which young Good says was taken in April or May last is certainly a very accurate picture of the boy who was taken to Mr. Hepler's [sic] and who, as the postal card above states, has been identified as the missing Ray Elliott.
The little boy also stated that he had lived at Marion, Ohio, but could not remember being in Marengo. The case is a strange one, indeed. Reuben Good says that his brother-in-law proposes to find the child, if possible. If the child is the same one that was with Mrs. Lucas when she lived in this city then it cannot be Ray Elliott, because at that time Ray was at his home in Marengo.
At Marengo there is no doubt as to the identity of the boy. The following letter was received by Marshal Klingaman:
Marengo, Iowa, July 20, 1894.
City Marshal Klingaman--Dear Sir: I have just written to Mr. and Mrs. Hepler, and I have only a few moments to spare, but I feel that a line is due to you. We reached home safely about half past six last evening. The news of our coming had been sent to the mother before we left Blairstown, and Mayor Morrison provided a private conveyance and sent her to meet us. She recognized her boy at once, and what a happy meeting! The way she went through that boy would have done your great big heart good. We had a season of rejoicing last night. The bells were rung and the whistles were blown and the park was filled with a vast crowd of sympathetic people. Many were the cheers that went up and many eyes were filled with moisture as I told the simple story of our visit to your place and the incidents by the way.
Our home-coming was a regular ovation all along the road. The people had got the word and in the towns and at farmhouses they came out by hundreds to see the boy.
It is a pity that they cannot be brought to justice. If you can get any clue to the identity of that woman who left the boy with Mr. and Mrs. Hepler, it would be worth the pains to follow it up. Again thanking you for your great kindness. I am, my dear sir, very sincerely yours, W. B. Phelps.
The above letter from the Presbyterian minister who was with Mr. Elliott, serves to make the mystery deeper. It seems very strange, indeed, that the boy should be so positively identified if he was not in fact the missing Ray Elliott.
A dispatch from Marengo under date of July 23, is as follows:
"No doubt as to the identity of Ray Elliott here. His mother knew
him by scars on his person. He knew her and called several friends
by name at sight. He knew articles of old clothing, places where he
formerly played, even where one neighbor formerly kept popcorn. The recent photograph, same as fourteen months ago. No person named Burke has yet appeared here claiming the boy. The Elliott family will keep him."
To most Davenporters, who have followed with interest the developments of the case, the situation concerning the identity of the boy Ray Elliott or Roy Burke, is now as badly mixed as the tariff question at Washington. It will be remembered that in the first place the boy in dispute was left at Waterloo by a strange woman, his supposed abductress, at the home of a Mrs. Hepler, and that the latter surmised the boy was the missing Ray Elliott. His subsequent identification by Mrs. Elliott as her son has been related. A Cedar Rapids Gazette reporter turned detective and yesterday afternoon found at Independence the woman who left Ray or Roy at Waterloo, a Mrs. David Lucas, whose story adds additional mystery to the already strange affair.
When asked concerning the case she said that she had just returned from Waterloo, where Monday she had heard for the first time the story of the supposed identification of Roy Burke as Ray Elliott. She told substantially the same story which has been published. The boy, she said, was born at the Muscatine county poor house while she was there as matron. He was the child of a young girl from Wilton Junction and being a sickly baby excited her pity. At the request of the mother she formally adopted him. His birth occurred July 30, 1889. The papers of adoption have been lost, but she expresses the utmost confidence that they will be duplicated. for some time she lived in Waterloo, and she was there slightly acquainted with the Heplers, whom, nevertheless, she did not care to associate with very much. Mr. Hepler being "only a hack driver." The boy was with them in Waterloo, and she claims that many there can identify him, though they have since cut his long curls and dressed him in trousers. Some of his worn clothing they exhibited with much feeling.
For the past two years the boy has been with her daughter, Mrs. Tom Burke, in Ohio. That lady returned to Independence recently and as complications had arisen which made it best that Mrs. Lucas keep the boy, she did so. These complications were no other than the appearance of another wife of Tom Burke which called the legality of the later marriage into question. July 5th, Mrs. Lucas went to Waterloo with the boy, intending to place him with a family there who had expressed a desire to adopt him. On her arrival she met Hepler whom she engaged to drive her to the park. He took a fancy to the child and asked the privilege of keeping him for a week to see if they liked him, intending to adopt him if he was satisfactory. Mrs. Lucas consented, Hepler promising to write if the child should be taken sick. The stories told by Hepler she explains on the hypothesis that that worthy was seeking the reward offered, at the time of the abduction, by the Elliotts. Mrs. Lucas was in high glee at the thought that he had been disappointed in this. She claims to have evidence that Mrs. Hepler had been at her house when she (Mrs. Lucas) lived at Waterloo and that in describing her as "an old fat woman" she was telling a willful falsehood. Mrs. Lucas, who weighs perhaps 200, says she is "a baby besides Mrs. Helper."
When she left the boy at Waterloo she says she wore a ten dollar dress and a ten or twelve dollar cape, and she considers Mrs. Hepler's description of her as "a gypsy" quite insulting. Mrs. Lucas says that if she is convinced that the Elliotts will give the boy a good home she will consent to their keeping him, on suitable papers being made out. Next!
T. D. Burk of Marion, Ohio, who claims to have had control of the boy known as Roy Burk and identified as Ray Elliott arrived in Marengo yesterday to lay claim to the little fellow. He was arrested charged with abduction and was put in jail. The telegram says other arrests will follow.
The latest chapter in the history of Ray Elliott which is as checkered and and [sic] mysterious as any 5-year-old ever had is the arrest of T. D. Burke at Marengo for abduction. What evidence the people there had against him the telegraph does not say. He is a saloon keeper at Marion, O., and it is from him the little boy claimed derives his name, Roy Burke. He expresses sympathy for Mr and Mrs Elliott but is sure that the boy they have is not their son Ray, but the boy they adopted out of the Muscatine county poor house. Mrs. Burke tried to hold the superintendent of the poor farm at Muscatine responsible for the present condition of affairs. He has written to her as follows:
You wanted me to see the child. We have nothing to do with it. The mother of the child let Mrs. Lines have it. You was by when I asked her if she wanted Mrs. Lines to have the child. She said she did; so you see that we have nothing to do with it. I am sorry that your are having trouble about it. If I could do you any good, I would. You stated in letter that we were responsible for the child. The mother is--she is the person. You know, too, that we came and took it back and then Mrs. Lines got the mother to let her have it; so she did. I told the mother, Liz, that we had nothing to do with it then.
The Marengo people are satisfied that the little fellow is Ray Elliott. They have put together every scrap of evidence and several test [sic] have proven it to their satisfaction. One is that two of the boy's toes are joined in a peculiar manner. Another is that he has recognized a number of acquaintances. He also went to a particular room in a neighboring house for pop-corn where he was in the habit of going for it while at home, and at another neighbor's, where a boy commenced playing on a drum, he asked for the horn which he used to toot as an accompaniment to the drum.
Their theory now in regard to Mrs. Burke's (nee Bertha Goode's) statement is that the boy she was permitted to take to her home by Mrs. Lines is not the one born in the Muscatine poor house but Ray Elliott; toat [sic] the Muscatine child had died and Ray Elliott was substituted for it by Mrs. Lines so that she conld [sic] continue to draw money from the father of the Muscatine child for its support. This substitution of one child for the other, it is believed, was not known to Mrs. Burke--hence her honest belief that the boy she called Roy Burke is not the same as Ray Elliott.
One chapter in the little fellow's history deals with his life in Davenport. He was here when a baby, in charge of Mrs. Lines. Mrs. Burke's mother, and was the subject of litigation.
On the 17th day of June, 1890, Bertha Goode, now Mrs. Burke, retained A. P. McGuirk in a case against her mother, Mrs. Lines, growing out of alleged ill-treatment on the part of her mother, and the case was tried before Justice Bleik Peters. At that time Mrs. Lines lived on Case street, in this city. On the same day Lizzie Maskell retained Mr. McGuirk in a case of habeas corpus, for the possession of her infant child, to get the possession of said child from Mrs. Lines, who then claimed to hold the child under articles of adoption, drawn in Muscatine, and acknowleged [sic] before John A. Rowan, then and now a justice of the peace.
Lizzie Maskell also retained Mr. McGuirk to bring suit against the putative father of said child, for the support of the same, and alleged that the father of her child lived at Wilton Junction, Ia., and was a railroad man.
Bertha Good was rather a fine looking, intelligent young girl, Who seemed disposed to do what was right, and objected to much that her mother did, and refused to comply with many of her mother's requests, which she deemed entirely improper for a girl of her age, and this led to the trouble between mother and daughter.
Lizzie Maskell was for a time employed at the Atlantic hotel in this city, and afterwards lived at many places in this city and is well known here. It is said she afterwards married a riving newspaper man and left the city.
Mrs. Lines was a woman of strong individuality, robust and very determined. A suit was brought by her though, McEniry & McEniry of Rock Island, against Michael Heffron of Case street, growing out of some difficulty over the renting of a house, but Mrs. Lines left the city and the suit never determined.
So far as these facts relate to the child in dispute, claimed to be Ray Elliott of Marengo, and so far as relates to Bertha Good, Mrs. Lines and Lizzie Maskell, there can be no question about it. The records of the court, both Justice Peters' court and the district court verify the statements herein contained.
A letter from Waterloo under date of August 13 says that T. D, Burke of Marion, Ohio, who was in that city Wednesday seeking proof to assist him to establish the identity of the boy that he claims has been in his keeping since November, 1892, arrived in Marengo Thursday, and before he succeeded in convincing Mr, Elliott that he (Elliott) was mistaken in regard to the child, Mr. Elliott swore out a warrant, charging Burke with the crime of abduction. Being a stranger he was unable to secure bondsmen and was locked up pending the preliminary examination, which was to commence yesterday. This move will undoubtedly result in establishing the boy's correct identity, as Burke will supoena [sic] witnesses from Marion. Mrs. Lucas and possibly others will probably be summoned to Marengo to assist in clearing Burke from the charge.
The affair has reached the ludicrus [sic] stage, and, while it is no joking matter for Burke at present, he will undeubtedly [sic] be able to clear himself, whether he secures Ray or not.
The Marengo Democrat of Thursday says:
"Thomas D. Burke of Marion, 0., who claims Ray Elliott arrived in the city this morning. We are not informed as to his purpose, but we presume he is here to try to establish his claim. The people here are certain that the boy is Ray Elliott, and no other child.
Later--We saw Mr. Burke after going to press and find that he has letters from prominent officials of Marion county and the city of Marion, showing his good standing during the two years he has lived there. While he would be glad to have the child again, he has no purpose of trying to take him away, but says he wants to satisfy himself and the public that the child is Roy Burke and not Ray Elliott. He does not even claim a legal right to the child, or that Mrs. Burke is its mother--simply that Mrs. Lncas [sic] who adopted it, put it in their possession in December, 1892, and that it remained there until this summer, when the same Mrs. Lucas took it to Waterloo, whence it was brought here."
Mr. Burke has been in consultation with the mayor and county attorney with a view of getting the matter in shape to show his good faith, and not to try to regain the child.
A dispatch from Independence tells of the arrest of Mrs. David Lucas, who lived in Davenport as Mrs. Lines, at that place and her being taken to Marengo to explain her connection with the Ray Elliott case.
She now admits that she was unable to positively identify the child as her adopted boy, but claims to be free from any guilt in the matter of the abduction. Her son, the Good boy, who has recently been discharged from the reform school, is wanted as a witness, but has not yet been apprehended by the Independence officers.
The marriage license book at the court house here furnishes another link in the history of the principal characters in the mystery. February 20,1893, Roy L. Quackenbush and Lizzie Maskell were married by Justice LeClaire. It has been rumored that this Lizzie Maskell who was the mother of the boy who was adopted
by Mrs. Lucas out of the Muscatine county poor house had married
Quackenbush and a search of the records verified the report. Her age at that time was 23 and her birth place is put down as Muscatine. Quackenbush gave Dubuque as his residence and age as 25. He will be remembered as the publisher of the A. P. A. organ in Rock Island and about the time of his marriage furnished
the names of the subscribers to the paper to the Iowa Catholic
Messenger as members of the order. The indignant protests of many as to any such membership will be recalled. Mr. Quackenbush and his wife disappeared from the vicinity soon after.
...
The Ray Elliott case, on trial at Marengo, which is exciting a good deal of interest throughout the country, is drawing to a close. The past week has been mostly taken up with examination of Mrs. Burke and her mother, Mrs. David Lucas, both of whom claim that the boy in question was in their possession long prior to the time Ray Elliott was kidnapped. The case will be decided this week.
The Elliott-Burke case which has continued at Marengo for the last seven weeks, is about through with. The arguments by the attorneys consumed all last week so far and are not yet concluded. A correspondent of the Des Moines Register says of the trial: J. H. Freeman opening for the prosecution gave an able dispassionate review of the evidence in the case, and spoke at length, occupying Monday and part of Tuesday. D. Homer Wilson, a versatile genius, did himself proud in his opening speech for the defense. Attorney Lake, a deep thinker, a forcible speaker and well versed in the law, besides having a wonderful memory, swept the board of every vestige of evidence that had a scintilla of weight for the prosecution in his forty-eight hours' closing for the defense, and the Burkes are happy. Truth shines out in all its resplendency in an array of evidence that can not be disputed. The boy's identity has been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt to the thinking people of this community to be that of Roy Burke.
Thomas Stapleton is now making the closing speech or argument for the prosecution. His panting inflammatory style breathes of anarchy and a defiance to law and government, when like the cattle, sniffing blood in the air, a certain few are goaded to desperation. One point of identification which Mrs. G. D. Burke gave in her former testimony, and which capped the climax, and
scored the last crowning victory for the defense, was sprung upon the court, and prosecution, by Attorney Lake in the closing up of his telling speech. 'Twas a scar--a deep cut, having been made upon the rim of the left ear of the boy. The parts never grew together, and left a separation which was plain to be seen by
the court and by persons at a considerable distance when attention was called to it. Considerable consternation prevailed in the court room at this time, and a recess was given. If prejudice plays any part in the decision of the case, then the higher courts will be appealed to.
Thomas D. Burke, bound over by the justice of the peace at Marengo to the grand jury on a charge of kidnaping [sic] Ray Elliott, presented to Judge Ney, through his attorney, C. S. Lake, a petition in habeas corpus, asking release on the grounds that the action of the justice who committed plaintiff was wrong in that he did not reach the right conclusion and the evidence did not show that the boy was Ray Elliott, or that a crime was committed. Judge Ney denied the petition and held that these questions are questions of fact upon which the committing magistrate had a right to pass, and that there is no right of appeal from a hearing on preliminary examination as there is in a case in which the justice has the right to try to determine and inflict punishment.
The Jones county calf case has at last come to a close, after about thirty years litigation, and the Ray-Roy Elliott-Burke case seems to be entered as a rival to that record-breaking suit. The Waterloo Courier says that the Burkes have instituted habeas corpus proceedings to regain possesion [sic] of the child and the hearing comes soon. In the meantime arrangements have been made by Attorney Stapleton of Marengo, the attorney for the estate in the case, to have a commission to take dispositions here and at other points in the county and elsewhere "in regard to the character of Bertha Burke, formerly Good." "Formerly Good" is
thought by some parties to fit the plaintiff's character in the double sense of the sound of the legal description.
The Burke-Elliot case, which has attracted so much attention in Davenport on account of the local features in the case, being an action brought by Mrs. Thomas D. Burke of Marion, O., for the possession of the boy claimed in Marengo as Ray Elliott, is being tried without a jury before Judge J. M. Wade, in Marengo, who is confining the trial to its legal limits, and the sensational scenes that characterized the trial of the case against Burke in the justice's court last summer are conspicuously absent from the proceedings.
Mrs. David Lucas, who left the boy with Mrs. Hepler in Waterloo last July, where he was found by Mr. Elliott, was the first witness called. She claims the boy in question to be a child born at the Muscatine county poor farm to one Lizzie Meskell and by her given under a deed of adoption to witness; that the child remained in her possession until Nov. 20, 1893, or until it was a little over three years old, when it was by her given to her daughter, Mrs. Burke; and that Mrs. Burke came to Independence the latter part of July, bringing the boy with her. Later a quarrel between mother and daughter occurred, and the former took possession of the child and went with it to Waterloo. Here a Mrs. C. P. Hepler was solicited to adopt the child, and was induced to take him a few days on trial, and before her return the boy had been claimed by George Elliott as his lost Ray and taken to Marengo.
Mrs. Lucas was followed by her husband, her son, George M. Good,
and her daughter, Mrs. Burke, the plaintiff in the case, who testified to substantially the same story.
...
Marengo dispatch: Judge Wade filed a long opinion in the Burke-Elliott case. The decision is in substance that the plaintiff has no legal title by adoption. The child is the ward of the state and subject to the orders of the courts. For the good of the child, if Ray Burke, the child, is the son of an abandoned woman, the court is loath to find such a conclusion, judicially
fixing a stigma on the child. The Elliotts believe the child is theirs. He is attached to them, and the family. The evidence of Burke's marriage is unsatisfactory. Mrs. Burke, as a witness, shows unfitness for the custody of the child. The preponderance
of evidence favors the identity of Ray Elliott. The case is
disposed of on other grounds which it is unnecessary to discuss. The child is remanded to the Elliotts' care.
The case of the State of Iowa vs. Mrs. Thomas D. Burke for perjury is to be tried in the district court at Cedar Rapids soon, if not dismissed. Mrs. Burke is the woman who claims to be the foster mother of the lost Ray Elliott, of Marengo, over whose disappearance and recovery such a stir was made a year or so ago. She was formerly a resident of Muscatine, where she was known as Bertha Goode, The present charge against her is based on alleged false statements made by her under oath in the legal fight for the possession of the boy. That light, it will be remembered, resulted in giving him to the Elliotts, with whom he now is. The court did not pass upon the identity of the boy, but turned him over to the Elliott family under the evidence, and the present case against Mrs. Burke grows out of the bitterness engendered in the trail. It is held that the false statements made by Mrs. Burke affected trivial matter, in her own personal history only, and had no real bearing on the case, and that there is a question as to the commission of perjury in making them, when the strict legal definition of that term is carefully regarded.
The people of Iowa county have two petitions out asking for the dismissal of the case against Mrs. Burke. One petition is signed by the business men and taxpayers urging dismissal on the ground of the incertainty [sic] of her conviction in the case, and the great expense attendant upon so flimsy a case. the other petition is signed by the women of the county, notably church members, asking for a dismissal on the grounds os [sic] persecution. The petition alleges that Mrs. Burke has had trouble enough already, that she is more sinned against than sinning; that her family needs her ministrations, and that the law of Christ impells [sic] forgiveness rather than punishment.
As for Ray Elliott, the Cedar Rapids Gazette says that it has information, apparently reliable, to the effect that the boy is very poorly cared for by the Elliots; that he is playing about the streets of Marengo, thinly clad, with dirty face, unkempt hair, and a general aspect of neglect and indifferent treatment at home. Elliott, the father, it is said, has been quite a hard drinker, if he is not now; his home is a poor one, meagerly furnished and provided, and the lot of the lost boy is not the happy one it has been imagined to be by people who read the accounts of his abduction, pursuit and recovery.
The Ray Elliot case has stirred up Iowa county more completely than the famous Jones county calf case stirred up the neighborhood in which it started. The dissensions that have sprung from it have influenced business relations and elections. The people of the county have had enough of it and THE LEADER thinks it ought to be sawed off short right where it is. It is fair to infer that Mrs. Burke is of the same mind.
County attorney John Grimm of Linn county closed the last chapter of the celebrated Ray-Elliott case Saturday by entering a nolle prossequi in the case of state of Iowa vs Mrs. Martha Burke as is shown by the following Associated press dispatch from Cedar Rapids which reads as follows:
"The last chapter in the celebrated Ray-Elliott case closed in the district court today, when the case against Mrs. Martha Burke, who was charged with perjury, said to have been committed during the trial for habeas corpus proceedings commenced by Mrs. Burke to gain possession of the boy decided by the courts of Iowa county to be Ray-Elliott, was dismissed by motion of County Attorney Grimm."
The case had considerable local interest attached to it and has been followed by the local press through all of its phases. The last step was taken was by Mrs. Burke who now resides in Ohio. She sought to secure possession of the child by a writ of habeas corpus. The case was tried before Judge Wade at Marengo. The court here passed upon the identity of the child and gave an adverse decision to the claims of Mrs. Burke. There was considerable conflict of evidence in the case. The result was that the testimony was presented to the grand jury, which returned an indictment against Mrs. Burke, charging her with perjury. The defendant took a change of venue from Iowa county, to Linn, where the the [sic] trial was to have come off at the present term of court, but County Attorney Grimm caused "finis" to be written.
Mrs. T. D. Burke has writtdn [sic] her attorney, A. P. McGuirk, from Bellfontaine, Ohio, expressing her gratitude for his services in connection with her release from custody on the charge of perjury. The perjury case rose out of the famous Ray Elliott case, which was tried at Marengo some time ago. There is a possibility that a suit for damages will be instituted by Mrs. Burke against the parties whom she accuses of prosecuting her.
Waterloo, March 27.--Reuben Good, who is awaiting trail on the charge of assault with intent to commit great bodily injury upon the person of his mother, has made a sensational statement to the county attorney which, if true, clears up the long standing mystery of the famous Ray Elliott case. His statement in brief, is that his mother, Mrs. David Lucas, murdered the 4-year-old illegitimate son of her own daughter, cut the body to pieces and burned it. That she then left La Porte City, where the fearful deed was committed, in terror lest the neighbors should discover her guilt. That she went to Marengo, where she saw Ray Elliot at play. That she watched her chance, kidnapped the child and merged his identity into that of the daughter's child which she had killed. Good declares that his mother told him this story and that it has been corroborated to him by others who were in his mother's confidence.
Waterloo, Ia., Mar. 28--Reuben Good, a prisoner in the county jail, County Attorney Reed, in which he today made a signed statement to County Attorney Reed, in which he accuses his mother, now Mrs. David Lucas of Laporte City, of the murder of the infant child of a daughter and he kidnaping of another child to replace the one murdered.
Good's statement, if true reveals the circumstances of the kidnaping of Ray Elliott at Marengo.
Good states that his mother took from a foundling's home in Muscatine in 1893 the young child of her daughter. The girl had entered the home under the name of Miskell [Meskell]. Her mother took the child to Laporte City, and one day, in a fit of anger the son alleges, struck at it, overturned the high chair in which it was
sitting, and it was fatally hurt, dying in a few moments. Afterwards Mrs. Lucas became alarmed, the son says, and fearing her daughter might come to claim her child she went to Marengo and stole the Elliott child and turned it over to her daughter, who
believed it to be her own child.
Later it was brought to Waterloo and left at the home of Mrs. Hepler, who, believing it was the Elliott child for which a reward of $500 had been offered turned it over to the authorities. The parents of the missing boy, Ray Elliott identified the child as their own, but did not obtain possession of it until after a long legal battle. County Attorney Reed says he will not proceed against the woman until a fuller investigation has been made.
Waterloo, March 28.--Reuben Good, a prisoner in the county jail, yesterday made a signed statement to County Attorney Reed, in which he accuses his mother, now Mrs. David Lucas, of La Porte City, of the murder of the infant child of a wayward daughter and the kidnaping of another child to replace the one murdered.
The alleged crime occurred in 1893, according to Good's story, at La Porte City, and the reason that the prisoner reveals it how is because he is under indictment on the charge of robbing his mother of a sum of money. He declares she is persecuting him and trying to send him to the penitentiary to seal his lips.
Good's statement is startling in its disclosure, and, if true, reveals the circumstances for the first time of the kidnaping of Ray Elliott, at Marengo, a case which filled the papers for many days, and the history of which has been published in book form.
Good stated that his mother took from a foundlings' home in Muscatine in 1893, the young child of her daughter. The girl had entered the home under the name of Miskell. Her mother took the child to La Porte City, and one day, in a fit of anger, the son alleges, struck at it, overturned the high chair in which it was sitting, and it was fatally hurt, dying in a few moments.
To cover her crime, it is alleged, the woman then burned the child in a kitchen stove, hiding the odor of burning flesh by feeding feathers to the fire.
Afterward Mrs. Good became alarmed, the son says, and, fearing her daughter might come to claim her child, she hastily left LaPorte. Later she was in Marengo, and, seeing a little boy on the street which she thought resembled the dead child, she conceived and carried out a plan for kidnaping it. This was the Elliott child.
Mrs. Good took the kidnaped child to LaPorte and turned it over to her daughter, who believed it to be her own child. Later it was brought to Waterloo and left at the home of Mrs. Hepler [sic], who, believing it was the Elliott child for which a reward of $500 had been offered, turned it over to the authorities.
The case was a most notable one. The daughter, who in the meantime had married, came to Waterloo and claimed the child as Roy Miskel [sic], and that it was one she had adopted as a baby, and turned over to her mother to care for. The parents of the missing boy, Ray Elliott, identified the child as their own, but did not obtain possession of it until after a long legal battle.
County Attorney Reed says the statement of young Good is cleverly gotten up and bears many marks of being true, but he will not proceed against the woman until a fuller investigation has been made.
Waterloo, March 30.--It has been discovered that even if Mrs. Sarah Good of this city is guilty of killing her grandchild, as declared in the signed statement of her son, Reuben Good, made this week, she canot [sic] be prosecuted because of the statute of limitations. The alleged crime would be that of manslaughter only, and punishment cannot be indicted at this late date. The confession made by Reuben Good, who is awaiting trial on a charge
of robbing his mother, clears up the famous Ray Elliot kidnaping case which was for two years before the Marengo county courts, and has been a profound mystery. Good states that Ray Ellott [sic] was stolen to take the place of an illegitimate child, which had
been killed in a fit of anger and his body buried. The code of Iowa defines manslaughter as the taking of human life in a fit of anger or without premeditation, expressed or implied. Section
5165 of the code, which includes manslaughter, provides that an indictment for public offense must be found within three years of the time of the commission of the deed.
The statement made by Reuben Good, a prisoner in the county jail at Waterloo, Ia., that his mother, Mrs. David Lucas, of Laporte City, Ia., is guilty of the murder of an infant child of her wayward daughter and the kidnaping of another child to replace the one murdered, recalls the fact that Mrs. Lucas, when she was Mrs. Good, used to live years ago in one of Mike Heffron's rent houses on Case street, in this city. At that time she had in her possession an illegitimate child of one Lizzie Maskall, who used to live at Wilton Junction and who gave birth to this little boy at the poor farm in Muscatine county. Mrs. Good had adopted the baby and the articles of adoption drawn up in due form by John A. Rowan, now police magistrate of Muscatine, had been duly filed. Later, however, the Maskall woman began a habeas corpus action in Scott county to get the child back, but failed in the suit by reason of the articles of adoption.
These events occurred years ago and Bertha Good, sister of the John A. Good who is now in jail at Waterloo, was a mere girl, being not more than 14 or 15 years of age. The Goods moved from this city to La Porte, Blackhawk county, and there became involved in the matter of the abduction of the child, Ray Elliott, at Marengo, the claim being made by Mrs. Good that the so-called Ray Elliott was the illegitimate child-of Lizzie Maskall and had been given by Mrs. Good to her daughter, who had married a man living in Central Ohio, named Burke.
Burke had come on from Ohio to Marengo and was arrested on a charge of complicity in the alleged abduction of the Elliott boy. While he was in the office of Lawyer Beam, then county attorney, a mob of angry citizens of Marengo attempted to use force against him, and only energetic action on the part of Mr. Beam saved Burke
from bodily violence. The information filed against the Ohio man charged him with attempted kidnaping. A preliminary examination was held before a justice of the peace and lasted for 40 days, during all of which time excitement was at a white heat throughout
Iowa county, threats of lynching were heard on all sides and in the courtroom itself several personal encounters occurred between attorneys. County Attorney Beam and Thos. Stapleton appeared for the state, and it was one of these men who nearly pulled out the
long whiskers of Attorney Lake of Lake & Wilson, who represented the defendant. On several occasions during the hearing the spectators broke over the railing and started a rough house. Finally, however, Burke was bound over to the grand jury, which
failed to indict him.
Meantime the child was in the hands of the authorities, and habeas corpus proceedings were begun in the district court before Judge M. J. Wade, who, after a week's trial, gave possession of the boy to the Elliotts. During this hearing testimony was given by Mrs, Burke, formerly Bertha Good, which formed the basis of a charge of perjust [sic] against her. The information was filed against her before Squire Morrison of Marengo. At this stage Mrs. Burke telephoned for A. P. McGuirk, whom she had known in Davenport. Mr. McGuirk appeared with Lake & Wilson in the hearing, which resulted in their client, Mrs. Burke, being bound over. She was released on bail only after her attorneys had made the greatest efforts. Application for a change of venue from Iowa county to Linn county was made and the county attorney of the latter county dismissed the case and so ended the charge of perjury.
The Ray Good, or Ray Burke, referred to by the man in jail at Waterloo, is the same child that Mrs. Good adopted in Muscatine county. It has always been a mystery how it happened, if the child awarded to the Elliotts by Judge Wade was really their child, what became of the Ray Burke or Ray Good, the whereabouts of whom have never been revealed.
Five or six years ago Mrs. Lucas, then Mrs. Good, whom her son now accuses of murder, resided in Davenport a second time and was an important witness in a very sensational case tried in the district court. Her son's story is that one day in La Porte City, in a fit of anger, she struck the child, overturned the high chair in which it was sitting and caused it to get fatally hurt by the fall. The Waterloo prisoner adds that his mother then burned the child's body in a kitchen stove, feeding feathers to the fire to conceal the odor of burning flesh.
Afterward Mrs. Good became alarmed, the son says, and hastily left La Porte. Later she was in Marengo, and, seeing a little boy on the street which she thought resembled the dead child, she conceived and carried out a plan for kidnaping it. This, it is alleged, was the Elliott child.
Waterloo, IA., April 1. County Attorney Reed has returned from Laporte and says he has investigated further the charges made by Reuben Good against his mother, Mrs. David Lucas. He still maintains that the Good story is a fairy tale. He says he can find nothing to substantiate the testimony of Good.
Mr. Reed admits, however, that many of the people of Laporte, in fact the majority of them, do put stock in the story although it was claimed by some that Mrs. Lucas left Laporte with the Meskell child before Ray Elliott was kidnaped and never lived there after that time. Mr. Reed says he has learned that Mrs. Lucas left Laporte during the spring of '92 taking with her the child. The county attorney claims the evidence to the effect that she really did take the child away while it was alive is conclusive, hence she could not have killed the Meskell babe while she lived in Laporte, as her son says.
As further evidence of this is is [sic] said that when John Husman died in the fall of the same year, four months later, she returned with the child to the funeral. It was, they say, the same child. After that time she was never seen with the child in Laporte and if she killed him the deed must have been done while she lived in Waterloo, as she brought the boy here. For a time she resided over a restaurant at the corner of Fifth and Commercial streets and also in a building now removed for the building of the Lamson block. It is during this time that trace of the Meskell child is lost. Ray Elliott was stolen in May of '93.
Her own father and mother, however, declare that the child taken from Mrs. Lucas known as the Elliott boy was not the Meskell boy. Of this they say they are very positive and cannot be mistaken. The boy was different in every way, and there was no change to be mistaken.
It remains, then, that the Meskell child must either have been given away, have been killed or have died a natural death. If it is not dead, where is it? If this child known as Ray Elliott is Ray Elliott and the Meskell boy did die a natural death, how did Mrs. Lucas come into possession of Ray Elliott and why?
...
Waterloo, April 13.--Reuben Good of La Porte City entered a plea of guilty to ussault with intent to kill and was sentenced to six months in the penitentiary. He Is the young man, who made the confession accusing his mother of having murdered her's [sic] illegitimate child and kidnaping the the [sic] Elliott child.
Waterloo,--May 2.--Reuben Good, whose confession about the kidnapping of Ray Elliott recently startled Iowa, has received the copy of the decree of divorce from his former wife from Nebraska, and this morning Sheriff Law took Good to Laporte, where the woman with whom he has been living prior to his incarceration for assault upon his mother, is about to become a mother. The marriage service was spoken of and Good was then taken to the penitentiary at Anamosa where he will serve a short term. He has expressed a desire to lead a better life.