Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Know Your FEMA Region

Prepare to be "kept safe" by the Corporatement.

If this image is new to you then please start educating yourself by looking into the wonderful plans our lords in the "public/private partnerships" (formerly the United States of America, a constitutional republic) have in store for us -- and more importantly -- have in store for the little boys and girls in our nation whose parents prefer to watch TV and sports and live in a state of deep denial instead of standing up and defending their God-given rights.

The USA has been deliberately dumbed down. Our educational system is not a failure; it has completely succeeded in achieving the goals it was designed to meet. Look up Isserbyt, "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America."


Wednesday, January 18, 2012

“PC Kidnappers”: The Crimes Against James Wade & His Family - 1989

FULL TEXT: (Article 1 of 2): On the morning of May 9, 1989, eight-year-old Alicia Wade awoke complaining of pain deep in her midsection. Her father, 37-year-old Navy enlisted man James Wade, and her mother Denise, took the girl to the NAVCARE facility in San Diego, where initially she either couldn’t or wouldn’t explain what happened. The doctor found that the child’s anal and vaginal regions had been torn in a sexual attack and would need to be surgically repaired. When informed of this, both parents showed great distress and began to weep uncontrollably. The NAVCARE doctor immediately called the local Child Protection Services.

CPS immediately suspected family involvement for two reasons: the rapist, they believed, had not removed the child from her room, and Alicia did not immediately complain of pain. The CPS worker interpreted the hours the Wades had spent at NAVCARE as a delay in reporting the crime, and thus an additional sign of guilt.

Though shaken by what had happened to their daughter and also by the hints of accusation they felt coming from authorities, the Wades cooperated fully in an interview with CPS. They could not hide the fact that they were overweight, which child welfare authorities often take as evidence of general neglect. They did not hide the fact that Denise Wade had been molested as a child and that James was a recovering alcoholic who twice blacked out while drinking in foreign ports. They did not know that they were waving “red flags” that further substantiated suspicions toward family involvement in the crime. They had no idea that authorities were already beginning to build a case against them and were taking particular aim at James Wade, who was a walking bull’s-eye because he was a white middle-aged male and a serviceman in addition to his other defects.

The Wades were more interested in the facts. During an evidentiary exam at the Center for Child Protection, their daughter Alicia calmly told the physician that a man came through the window, claimed to be her “uncle,” took her out in a green car and “hurt” her. They would have had a better notion of the ordeal ahead of them if they had known that on the space on the medical form for “chief complaint in the child’s own words,” the examining doctor ignored Alicia’s testimony and wrote only that the child showed “total denial.”

Alicia provided a detailed description of the attacker’s clothing, color of hair and eyes, even a pimple on his face. James Wade, a genial Missourian, cooperated fully with the police, who collected evidence including smeared fingerprints and a partial footprint outside Alicia’s window. Wade submitted to a polygraph and a “rape test kit” which included a semen sample. He did not know enough about the murky legal realm he had entered to request that the sample be compared to Alicia’s semen-stained panties, which police seized, but did not examine.

After a long interrogation and numerous accusations by the police, James Wade said, “You’re so sure I did it, but if I did it, I sure don’t remember it.” Child-welfare workers, who soon began to direct the examination of the Wades, repeatedly lifted this line from its context and construed it as an admission of guilt, not an expression of frustration, shock or anger. They were not interested in the fact that four of Alicia’s friends who lived within a four-block area of the Wade home had also recently been sexually attacked and that, in each case, the attacker had entered through a bedroom window. Five days after the rape of Alicia, in another Navy housing project, five-year-old Nicole S. was abducted through a window and attacked. Some two weeks after the attack on Alicia, police confirmed that someone attempted to break through the bedroom window of the Wades’ six-year-old son, Joshua. All these episodes notwithstanding, James Wade was the prime suspect in the rape of his daughter.

While Alicia was being prepared for surgery, guards forcibly removed Denise Wade from the hospital. The surgeon was outraged that the mother was not present. Alicia was crying for her parents, but investigators from the Department of Social Services forbade the parents to speak to her. In spite of a request by the Wades, no one explained what was happening to the girl, whom social workers packed off to a therapist and placed in a foster home. In the argot of the child-abuse industry, what had happened to the Wades is called a “parentectomy.”

At this point, the Wades were unaware that their ordeal was part of a national syndrome which began in the 1970’s with Walter Mondale’s Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act and has gained momentum in the last few years with the proliferation of feminist ideologies about the evils of patriarchy and politically correct thinking about the nuclear family as a locus classicus of sexual oppression and violence. Fueled by state monies, the child protection system has grown to immense proportions, like the monster Woody Allen describes in Sleeper with “the body of a crab and the head of a social worker.”

In Wounded Innocents: The Real Victims of the War Against Child Abuse, Richard Wexler examines the national child protection system and documents a number of horror stories. Parents have been charged with child abuse for being late to pick up their children at school, letting them eat breakfast at McDonald’s too often, or for not letting them watch television after 7:30. In this Wonderland world, the operant principles have less to do with the Constitution than with the maxim of Lavrenti Beria, Stalin’s chief of the NKVD: “You bring me the man, I’ll find the crime.”

Wexler shows how the statistics which assert the existence of a national epidemic of child abuse are based on reported cases in which some 60 percent are bogus, amounting to one million false accusations every year nationwide.  In the police state atmosphere of child protection, informers remain anonymous, and the accused remains branded with a scarlet A even after they have been cleared of wrongdoing. It is a system rife with abuses and filled with the arrogance of power, yet the child police continue to assure us that child abuse is an “American tradition” for which the only remedy is massive, aggressive intervention by the state.

The case of the Wade family fully magnified all the intrinsic defects of the system. The following account is based on original interviews with the victims, public officials, and some press accounts from an excellent investigative series in the San Diego Union. Its primary source, however, as a number of highly detailed reports by the San Diego County Grand Jury, which has been investigating the child protection system since 1988. All told, the jury received testimony from hundreds of witnesses from all areas of the system: the judiciary (Superior Court and Court of Appeal), defense bar, appellate bar, public defenders, Family Court, Center for Child Protection, District Attorney and a number of victims. The jurors also spent many days observing court proceedings, visiting “receiving homes” for children, and attending Juvenile Justice Commission meetings. The jury also received testimony from some social workers who wanted to blow the whistle on corruption. Such workers had to testify without notifying their superiors, lest they suffer retaliation.

One institution in which the Wades found themselves enmeshed was San Diego’s Center for Child Protection. The Director is Dr. David Chadwick, who has been described in the local press as a “definitive zealot” for a system ruled by politically correct thinking. Chadwick once told a state legislative committee that his organization performed evidentiary examinations, not in a disinterested search for the facts, but in order to “prove abuse.” Reporters at the Union found a number of instances where Chadwick’s Center “diagnosed molestation when other medical authorities insisted there wasn’t any.”

Through Chadwick’s agency, the Wades learned the concept of “denial.”  In denying that James Wade had raped his daughter, the couple was seen, not as asserting innocence that could be adjudicated by a review of the facts, but rather, as being “in denial.” And “denial,” as the Grand Jury noted, is taken by the system as evidence of guilt, a tactic the child police share with the KGB and other professional witch-hunters.

“Denial” is the child protection system’s version of perpetual motion, an incantation that makes the presumption of innocence disappear. Richard Wexler records the following classic exchange between a caseworker and a woman named Susan Gabriel, whose husband Clark had been accused of molestation:

       CASEWORKER: We know your husband is guilty, you’ve got to force him into admitting it.

       GABRIEL: How do you know he is guilty?

       CASEWORKER: We know he’s guilty because he says he’s innocent.  Guilty people always say they’re innocent.

       GABRIEL: What do innocent people say?

       CASEWORKER: We’re not in the business of guilt or innocence, we’re in the business of putting families back together.

       GABRIEL: So why not do that with us?

       CASEWORKER: Because Clark won’t admit his guilt.

If, as was the case with Denise Wade, the wife should be so stubborn as to support her accused husband, she is adjudged to be co-dependent and “accommodating the denial.” And if the child denies the charge, this is considered merely part of the “child-abuse protection syndrome.”  As the Grand Jury later reported, Alicia Wade’s only “denial” was that her father was the attacker. The possibility that Alicia was telling the truth and that James was innocent never entered the minds of the child police.

Once enrolled in the Kafkaesque Center for Child Protection, the Wades soon found themselves in the hands of social workers. Most members of the profession (about 70 percent in San Diego) are female and, according to both victims and longtime observers of the system, many come to the job seeing themselves as liberators, rescuing the innocent from an oppressive, male-dominated dungeon called the family.

Social workers are not required to record their interviews, and their statements, often used in court, frequently include hearsay evidence and are not made under penalty of perjury. After sifting mountains of evidence, the Grand Jury found that social workers “lie routinely, even when under oath.”  And there were “numerous instances” in which social workers disobeyed court orders. Everything is on the worker’s side. They simultaneously acquire evidence for the prosecution and “provide services” to the family of the accused (which the accused end up partially or fully footing the bill for).  Families enter the process eager to cooperate, but are soon horrified to find their statements distorted, taken out of context and used against them.

In the Wades’ case, for example, a social worker told the couple early on that if they showed any emotion (under the circumstances, a perfectly natural response) they would not be allowed contact with the child. When they complied, the same social worker then accused them of being “unconcerned” about their daughter, using this allegation in court.

Jim Wade found himself “horrified by the absolute power over the lives and freedoms of an individual American that these individuals are allowed to exercise.” All of the DSS reports about the Wade family failed to include anything positive. They did not mention that Wade’s drinking was not a source of problems, and that he had not been drinking the day of the attack. There was no reference to his Navy record, which, except for his weight problem, was described as “superb.” Reports also ignored Denise Wade’s day-care business, which ran with no problems, and no one bothered to interview parents of the children she cared for. Reports further failed to mention that Alicia was an A student, who had just been named Student of the Month at her grammar school. There was no mention of family participation in community and church activities.

In a videotaped interview, Alicia was asked with whom she would feel most safe. “My mom, dad, and brother,” she answered. The transcript of the tape, however, chopped the reference to the father. A child-protection official later acknowledged that he never bothered to review the video.

Feminist cliches and anti-family zealotry are not the only forces that drive the system. Here, as in political abuses, the Watergate rule applies: follow the money. Therapists who fail to back up the social worker’s allegations can quickly find themselves out of lucrative court referrals. And referrals applying to military families are particularly lucrative, because they are backed by the fathomless funds of the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS). San Diego County pays court-appointed therapists $40 an hour, but CHAMPUS springs for nearly double: $78.60 for 45 minutes of psychotherapy. The Wades went to therapy twice a week.

Alicia’s therapist was Kathleen Goodfriend of the La Mesa Village Counseling Group, who worked on the case entirely without supervision. Like the social workers now pawing through the Wades’ lives, Goodfriend ignored the evidence and assumed more or less automatically that Jim Wade had been the attacker, although his daughter continued to staunchly deny this in their sessions.  Receiving more than $11,000 in state monies for this case alone, Goodfriend began relentlessly to brainwash Alicia Wade, now totally isolated from her family, pressuring her into naming an “acceptable perpetrator.” That is, her father.

The Grand Jury eventually subpoenaed Goodfriend’s notes, which contained many comments about how Alicia “liked” her therapist. But Alicia’s own testimony makes it clear that the child wanted only to go home. The Grand Jury was also alarmed that Goodfriend taught the child about masturbation “without any parental input or apparent interest by the child.”

While Goodfriend worked on Alicia’s mind, the Wades’ social workers were working on her future. They rejected Alicia’s grandparents, aunts and uncles, the pastor of the family church and the father’s attorney as possible custodians for Alicia because of their “allegiance with the parents.” One social worker told Alicia’s grandmother not even to waste her time coming to San Diego because her son James was guilty of raping Alicia, who would not be coming home to anyone in the family. Instead, they were sticking the girl in a foster home and the social worker and Goodfriend would be controlling all access to it.

Children are put into foster homes as quickly as possible because that act opens the floodgates of federal funds. Foster parents receive $484 a month for a child from ages 5 to 18, almost twice the amount a welfare mother receives for her own offspring. Special care cases can bring up to $1,000 a month. And all funds are tax free. Some foster parents are concerned and caring, but others are entrepreneurs in what the Grand Jury called “the baby-brokering business.” They depend on the goodwill of social workers to get and keep the little human beings who keep the government checks coming.

Alicia Wade’s second foster mother -- for unexplained reasons, the girl was traumatically removed from the first foster family where she was placed -- believed her story about a man coming through her window. She sought to testify that the child not only had no fear of her father, but desparately wanted to return home. This outraged social workers, who promptly yanked Alicia from that home and reported an “infraction” to the foster care licensing department. The social workers then placed Alicia in a third home. This one had a difference: the foster parents were trying to adopt a child through the “fast track” program. Alicia was offered as an obvious candidate.

By now, the Wades knew they were in a hostage situation. To get their child back, they had to fully cooperate with accusatory bureaucrats who assumed their guilt from the start.

James Wade willingly submitted to polygraph tests. One of these was inconclusive; he passed two others and the examiner found no intent to deceive. Then there were some 700 questions to get through, part of a battery of tests that includes the Thorne Sex Inventory, the Multiphasic Sex Inventory, the Sexual Attitude Scale, the Sexual Opinion Survey and the Contact Comfort Scale. Here are some of the 300 “true and false” questions:

       “I have occasionally had sex with an animal.”

       “I get more excitement and thrill out of hurting a person than I do from the sex itself.”

       “I have become sexually stimulated while feeling or smelling a woman’s underwear.”

       “I have masturbated while making an obscene phone call.”

       “Younger women have tighter vaginas than older women.”

       “Sometimes I have not been able to stop myself from fondling one or more of the children in my family.”

And then, near the end, a light touch: “I have fantasized about killing someone during sex.”

Virtually all men accused of child abuse in San Diego must then endure a stretch on the “penile plethysmograph.” In this procedure, a therapist places the accused in a booth and shows him how to wire his penis to a mercury strain gauge. Then the therapist lowers the lights and starts a procession of erotica that can include child pornography, all the while watching dials that measure erection. During the video portion of the test, the operator stops the pictures, asks the subject how he feels, and waits until his organ “hits baseline” before continuing. (A San Diego social worker who administers the test has composed kiddy-porn audio tracks, with vignettes of fathers performing oral sex on their daughters.) At the conclusion of the test, the machine spits out a “phallometric score.”

Operating a penile plethysmograph is also a lucrative business, with some therapists charging $1,000 per session. Those backed by military insurance find themselves booked for more sessions than others. One tester claims to be able to use the device to provide “orgasmic reconditioning” to help the subject “learn to become sexually responsible.” He is currently trying to talk the Navy into letting him treat the Tailhook offenders. Specialists are developing a version for women that measures the engorgement of the labia along with a gauge that takes the temperature of the vaginal area.

Penile measurements are part of an inquisition that differs from the Salem witch hunts and the Moscow show trials in that the accused must pay cash upfront for the dubious privilege of being so degraded. The Wades found themselves required to accept all kinds of “services,” such as counseling, therapy, parenting classes and “abusers groups.” Though taxpayers shoulder much of the cost, the system bills many of the charges back to the family through a scheme called “Revenue and Recovery.” The out-of-pocket costs to the Wades, before being billed for foster care, were $260,000, not the kind of spare change a Navy man keeps around. Some accused have insurance; some don’t.

Once stuck in the court system, moreover, the Wades found themselves at a constant disadvantage in trying to establish their innocence. Unlike the prosecution, they had no money to pay for “expert” witnesses. (Jim Wade later pegged his legal fees at $125,000, and his insurance did not cover these costs.) When the Wades realized the deep anti-family animus of the system, they struck a plea bargain by pleading no-contest to a charge of “neglect,” part of a deal that would eventually return their daughter home. But after the bargain was struck, the county said that, based on the recommendations of Kathleen Goodfriend, Alicia would not be returning home.

The Wades’ attorneys argued that the parents should have moved to have the plea overturned and requested a jurisdictional trial. The DSS countered that if they tried that tactic, the DSS would also seize their son Joshua and put their family “further behind the eight ball.” This threat constituted an offer the Wades couldn’t refuse.

Later on, as part of its review of the Wade case, the Grand Jury found that the entire juvenile system was characterized by “confidential files, closed courts, gag orders and statutory immunity” and had “isolated itself to a degree unprecedented in our system of jurisprudence and ordered liberties.”  Said former court referee William Burns: “Any time you have secrecy you have the seeds of corruption...the people who are behind closed doors can do any damn thing they want. And in Juvenile Court, they do.” Evidence contrary to the system’s position, the Grand Jury found, is “either excluded or ignored” and more than 98% of the system’s petitions are granted. (During proceedings in the case at hand, for instance, the prosecution objected to Alicia’s own detailed description of her attacker as “hearsay” and the court sustained the objection.)

From October 1989 until June 1990, Alicia had no contact with her parents.  While the court proceedings dragged on, devastating the Wades financially and emotionally, social workers determined that Alicia was “adoptable” and that a parental rights termination hearing was appropriate.

All this time, the eager Kathleen Goodfriend was still interrogating Alicia.  One of her therapeutic tactics was to say that that she knew the father was the attacker, and that it was therefore “okay to tell.” But the child persisted in her detailed story about the intruder. Alicia continued to speak positively about her father, saying, “I love my parents and I want to see them.” As the date for a twelve-month hearing approached, Goodfriend stepped up her efforts, setting up a kind of tag-team system by ordering the foster mother also to pressure the child to “disclose.”

Thirteen months of isolation and brainwashing eventually took their toll. In late June of 1990, the nine-year-old girl succumbed. At a hearing later on, she said she couldn’t hold out any longer. The record makes it clear that she did this to get the therapist off her back.

After the “disclosure,” all questioning of Alicia stopped. Goodfriend’s “therapy” had achieved its goal. The foster parents immediately whisked Alicia away on a month-long trip to Disney World, an obvious reward for delivering the goods on her parents, as well as a diversion to keep her from recanting. At this point, Denise Wade, whose social worker had been pressuring her to leave her husband, had to be hospitalized to prevent suicide.

In December, James Wade was finally formally arrested on the charge of raping his daughter and found himself staring down the barrel of a 16-year prison term. The Torquemada in his inquisition would be Deputy County Counsel E. Jane Via, whose legal philosophy was summarized in the comment, made in another court case: “Just because we can’t find evidence that this man molested that child doesn’t mean that he is not guilty.”

Via had perfected one of the child abuse system’s key strategies: winning by attrition. Her collaborators in social services farm out the children she is trying to extricate from their families to pet foster parents, and delay “reunification” until the child “bonds” with the new parents. Then they use this testimony, backed by testimony from friendly therapists, to block family reunification and justify adoption. According to one investigator, the child police tell foster parents to take the children on long and frequent vacations. Then they turn around and accuse the natural parents of not seeing their children enough. It was Via who tried to justify removing Alicia’s brother Joshua from the Wade home.

Via’s zealous pursuit of James Wade involved an irony which soon acquired crushing weight. Before handling the Wade case, Via was the Deputy District Attorney who prosecuted the man authorities now believe was the one who assaulted Alicia. Via was thus fully aware that Albert Raymond Carder had been molesting girls in the Wades’ neighborhood, and that his modus operandi involved entering through a window, committing the crime and leaving without a trace. In the case of Nicole S., attacked five days after Alicia, the attacker drove a white truck, which was not consistent with Alicia’s testimony about a green car. But it emerged that at the time of the attack, Carder did indeed drive a green car, which he reported stolen not long afterward. The stolen car report was never given to the detectives, who apparently never ran a vehicle check on Carder.

Via ordered blood samples to be taken from Carder, whom she eventually tried and convicted. But later, when Via transferred to the office of the County Counsel and began to prosecute James Wade, she denied that she had ordered these blood samples and that there could be any connection between the cases of Nicole and Alicia Wade. (The jury found Via’s actions incomprehensible, and recommended that the state investigate her for possible conflict of interest and ethics violations.)

In the pretrial maneuvering, police finally examined Alicia’s semen-stained panties two years after the attack and determined that they could be tested.  It took months for DNA tests to be completed, but they finally confirmed that James Wade could not have been the man who attacked Alicia. It was a clear exoneration, but the D.A.’s office, where Via had previously worked, ordered that the tests be repeated, and the DSS continued to prohibit contact between father and daughter.

Convicted sex offender Albert Raymond Carder, on the other hand, was in the five percent of the population whose genetic profile matched that of the stains. His shoe size matched the print taken outside Alicia’s window. But even this powerful evidence was not enough. Once the child police could no longer deny third-party responsibility for the attack, the system marshaled its considerable resources to ensure that, however strong the evidence of Jim Wade’s innocence, Alicia still did not return to her family.

The Grand Jury later identified a “race against time to arrange for Alicia’s adoption prior to the availability of the DNA results.” When the result of the evidence was known, Jane Via strenuously resisted a defense motion to delay a hearing that would terminate the Wades’ parental rights. Cooperating with Via, Court referee Yuri Hoffman showed himself willing to have Alicia adopted even when James Wade’s innocence had been established.

In November 1991, two and a half years after the ordeal began, the D.A.’s office dropped rape charges against James Wade. Then judge Frederic Link issued a rare “true filing of innocence” for the embattled Navy man, which prosecutor Cathy Stevenson unsuccessfully opposed in court. Wade petitioned the court to have the original neglect charge, which had been part of his desperate plea bargain, set aside to clear his name and free the way for Alicia’s return. Wade said that the declaration of innocence was like getting out of jail. But his troubles were not over.

As a result of his ordeal, Wade had become an outcast in the community and so had Alicia’s brother Jason, one neighbor having forbidden his children to play with “the son of a pervert.” There were what Wade later described as “sleepless night, accusatory stares, the unending tears, the strain on our family, the doubts planted in the minds of our friends.” The legal fees, says Wade, “robbed me and my parents of our life savings.” And, of course, there was the absence of their daughter during a crucial formative period in her life.

But politically correct Jane Via did not believe that the Wades had suffered enough. Via argued that the finding of innocence for the parents “didn’t matter” because the original petition was not sexual molestation but neglect, which still provided sufficient grounds for Alicia’s adoption. The Wades appealed to the Grand Jury for help, and it was only through their eleventh hour intervention that Alicia escaped being adopted away forever.
On November 23, Alicia Wade was reunited with her family. The system that purportedly operated in her best interest returned the girl home using a medicine to which she was allergic, without the glasses she wore when she was taken from her parents and with no record of an ophthalmologist’s checkup. Two days later, on Thanksgiving Day, Alicia turned 11.

The Grand Jury found that the Wade case, which they said did not even need to be in the system, was far from unusual. In the San Diego area alone, the jurors found 300 cases with similar elements. No system could be without errors and mistakes, but the Jury was disturbed by the fact that rather than attempting to correct these problems, “the system appears designed to create or foster them, to leave them untested and uncorrected, and ultimately to deny or excuse them, all in the name of child protection.” The jurors described the system as out of control, with no checks and balances.

Faced with the overwhelming weight of the evidence, several agencies the Grand Jury criticized, including the DSS, admitted the problems and began to undertake reforms, including an emphasis on family reunification. The D.A.’s office was another matter. San Diego D.A. Edwin Miller is a board member of the Child Abuse Prevention Foundation, and the former head of his child abuse unit, now a local judge, is Harry Elias, married to Kee McFarlane, whose interviews with children were the basis for the McMartin preschool molestation case, the longest and costliest trial in American history. (See “Remembrance of Crimes Past,” p.7) Miller’s office justified its handling of the case and defended the vindictive Jane Via, but at least admitted that mistakes had been made. On the other hand, County Counsel Lloyd Harmon, Via’s other boss, admitted no misconduct, nor even the possibility of injustice.  Harmon’s response to the Grand Jury, incredibly enough, maintained that the Wade case “was handled in a thorough and professional manner and with due concern for the rights and interests of all parties.”

While the child police circled their wagons, the Wade family languished in debt and tried to deal with the emotional fallout. Yet, except for Court Referee Yuri Hoffman, none of those who had attempted to ruin the Wades’ lives stepped forward to apologize. No form of compensation was offered. And as far as can be determined, no one was fired or even severely disciplined over the Wade case. In December of 1992, more sophisticated DNA testing found a 100% match between the blood of convicted molester Albert Raymond Carder and genetic markers in the semen evidence in the Wade case. But as of January 1, 1993, the D.A.’s office had still not filed rape charges against Carder, probably because to do so would be to acknowledge the legitimacy of the suit James Wade had filed against the County.

What happened to Jane Via? It was more business as usual, the tragedy of James Wade not having altered her attitude or procedures. In November of 1992, Via represented the DSS in the case of Gavin O’Hara, whose daughter had been seized by a social worker and placed in the care of the social worker’s sister. O’Hara had been told that his being a Mormon and presumptive believer in patriarchy made it more likely that he would abuse the child. The social worker and her sister, testimony showed, had discussed taking the girl from him before she was even born. When Yuri Hoffman awarded custody to the natural father, Via went ballistic and petitioned for a new hearing based on the therapist’s belief that the child was suffering “separation anxiety.” It was the old attrition game that she had played with James Wade, but this time the court was having none of it. Judge Richard Huffman said that a “dumb system” had “brutalized” a child and sarcastically put Via down, to the undisguised delight of people in the courtroom.

And the therapist/masturbation instructor, Kathleen Goodfriend? It would seem that brainwashing a child for more than a year to get her to accuse her father of a crime would at least disqualify someone from getting court referrals. But Juvenile Court is still providing Goodfriend with a steady supply of lucrative clients. When asked if Goodfriend’s performance in the Wade case might merit some kind of censure, the official response was that a therapist was “innocent until proven guilty,” precisely the presumption that had been denied to the Wades.

Jim Wade retired from the Navy, and moved to his parents’ farm in Missouri. There, he hopes to heal the wounds and build a new life among the people he grew up with. He has filed a suit against San Diego County, saying, “I just want to be able to pay my parents back the money they gave me to fight this thing.” Slow to anger, Wade nonetheless tells anyone who asks that he believes the child protection system is filled with “pimps and parasites living off the miseries of others.”

Wade’s ordeal was dramatic, but don’t check the listings for a movie of the week. The story was optioned and shopped around Hollywood, but there were no takers. “The reason the networks turned it down,” says Wade, “was that they didn’t want to show anyone getting off [on a child abuse charge]. They got the wrong message, because that isn’t what it was about.”

Jim Wade has also undertaken a mission to warn others about the system. He has appeared on the “Larry King Show” and other programs, but he cites the op-ed piece he wrote for the San Diego Union, right after his family was reunited, as best representing what he wants to say: “Take heed, citizens of San Diego and all Americans. There is a creature running amok in your midst which can steal your children, your financial future and, very possibly, your personal freedom, as it did mine.”


FULL TEXT (Article 2 of 2): A former Navy man falsely accused of raping his daughter would get $2.5 million under a tentative settlement of his lawsuit against government agencies and individuals, The San Diego Union-Tribune has learned.

According to terms of the agreement, the city and county would combine to pay $1 million, psychotherapist Kathleen Goodfriend would pay $1 million and foster parents Carla and Michael Gregory would pay $500,000, sources said.

If approved by the San Diego City Council and county supervisors, the pact would end a five-year saga of personal tragedy and official bungling in which Jim Wade, instead of a more likely suspect, was charged with the rape; his wife, Dee, attempted suicide; and their daughter, Alicia, was almost adopted.

Earlier settlements in the case, involving Children's Hospital and various lawyers who represented the Wades, totaled $1.2 million, bringing the total settlement package to about $3.7 million.

Jim Wade, reached at a baseball game at Busch Stadium in St. Louis, called the settlement a mixed blessing.

"I am not particularly happy," he said. "There was really a large part of us that wanted to take them to trial to let everybody know what they did."

Under the terms of the settlement, Wade said, a significant portion of the money will be placed in a trust that his daughter, now 13, and son, Joshua, 11, will get when they turn 18. Another large chunk will go to pay the lawyers, he said.

Wade, 39, who was declared innocent by a judge after genetic tests proved he was not the rapist, retired from the Navy after 20 years of service and moved his wife and two children to his small hometown in Missouri.

In the 200-page lawsuit filed on behalf of the family, attorney Milton J. Silverman sought monetary damages of "not more than $100 million" from more than a dozen people, including social workers, police detectives and prosecutors.

It accused them of false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, conspiracy, malpractice, negligence, civil rights violations, cover-ups and fraud.

Silverman and the other lawyers involved in the case said yesterday they could not comment -- on order of Superior Court Judge Herbert Hoffman, who supervised the settlement discussions -- until the agreement is completed, which is expected next week.

The case, first publicized in October 1991, sparked widespread criticism of the local child-welfare system. The 1991-92 San Diego County grand jury spent months investigating the case and labeled it a "parade of horribles."

"Outrage is a good word to describe the feeling of the grand jury about this case," Richard B. Macfie, foreman of the panel, said yesterday. "It was a tragic derailment of justice.

"The evidence showed that the supposed experts involved discarded what the child had said and pre-empted any reasonable investigative procedures."

Alicia was raped and sodomized on the night of May 8, 1989, when she was 8. Threatened by her attacker with death if she told, the child reported to her mother the next morning only that it hurt when she urinated.

A doctor's examination found injuries so severe they required surgery.

Alicia told police, social workers and a physician that a man had come in her bedroom window at a Navy housing complex in Serra Mesa and carried her outside, "hurt her," and then brought her back.

Investigators disbelieved her story, however, even as she stuck to it for more than a year. They focused instead on the father, and removed Alicia from her home. She was put in foster care with the Gregorys.

Authorities suspected Wade for several reasons. He was in the Navy, where child-welfare authorities believe families are susceptible to the tensions and instability that can contribute to abuse. Wade is a recovering alcoholic, too, and his wife had reported a history of abuse in her family -- both red flags to investigators.

In focusing on the father, investigators discounted another man, Albert Raymond Carder Jr., who had been convicted of molesting four other girls, ages 7 to 10, in Alicia's neighborhood between February and May 1989. In at least two of the cases, Carder entered a house through a bedroom window. He was later convicted of abducting a fifth girl out of her bedroom window.

In June 1990, after months of counseling by Goodfriend and total isolation from her family, Alicia changed her story and said her father was the rapist.

Wade was arrested and faced 16 years in prison. He borrowed more than $100,000 from his parents to pay for his defense and other bills. Dee tried to kill herself and was hospitalized. Alicia was earmarked for adoption by her foster parents.

Then, with both the criminal case and the adoption moving forward, semen stains -- overlooked by police and prosecutors for almost two years -- were found on the girl's nightclothes.

They were analyzed and compared with blood from Wade. DNA testing proved the father did not leave the semen. He was declared factually innocent, and Alicia was returned home, 2 1/2 years after the rape.

Earlier this year, the District Attorney's Office completed more sophisticated DNA testing and charged Carder -- already serving a 25-year prison sentence -- with the attack on Alicia. His preliminary hearing is scheduled June 14.

Wade said one of the factors the family had to weigh in agreeing to the settlement was the possibility that government agencies would be granted immunity from the suit.

County and city officials had asked to be dismissed from the case, arguing that even if the suit's allegations were true, they were protected by laws intended to encourage the investigation and prosecution of crimes. A hearing on those motions was scheduled for yesterday.

"If the judge let the county out, I would never have been able to pay back my folks what I owed them," Wade said.

Wade said he wanted the case to go to trial, but after talking for several hours with Judge Hoffman in a settlement conference this week, he changed his mind.

[Mark Sauer, John Wilkens & Jim Okerblom, “Father Settles For $2.5 Million In Rape Case,” San Diego Union (Ca.), May 26, 1994, p. 1]


Friday, January 13, 2012

The Heart Balm Racket & Feminist Rhetoric in 1869

FULL TEXT: The New York Times of several days and other journals of this City contain articles on Amanda Craig’s modest suit for damages for breach of promise, while the reports of Women’s Rights meetings, tell us much of the often repeated “Degradation of Woman.”* There is, no doubt, a great deal of degradation, and, perhaps, there is no greater self-degradation, and, perhaps, there is no greater self-degradation of woman than these shameless, loathsome suits for “damages for blighted affections.” No law, except the English and American law, knows of such suits. A modern English Judge has said that these suits are well founded. A girl who, under a promise of marriage, loses other opportunities of a fair settlement, is entitled to damages for the loss of time. Is this the vaunted chivalry, romance, civilization of our “advanced age?” The twelve men who awarded $100,000 to the lady with the loving name must have considered her affections worth a great deal, even after she had shown, by suing Mr. Sprague, of what dimensions they must be. It is high time that, bylaw or State Constitutions, this legal coarseness and Anglican barbarity were totally abolished.

Equally self-degrading are those suits for damage for seduction, which are instituted by the seduced. The woman degrades herself in these cases to a simply passive being, as if she had no self-government, in the sense in which the old theologians – Baxter** and those great writers took their own translation of autnomy.

Nor do the men degrade woman less by the almost impunity they accord to the worst criminals among women. No female prisoner, however fiendish, but is pardoned, because it is so hard to execute a weak woman! As though a penal trial and penal punishment were a trial of strength! The impunity extended to woman deprives her of moral responsibility and degrades her in this point, even more than the former slave was, for slavery, full of contradictions as it was, exhibited also this glaring inconsistency: that, while it declared the negro a thing to be sold and bought, it nevertheless ascribed moral responsibility to him, and made him liable to penal trials, such as they were, and sure to suffer the penalties awarded him.

History, from the most distant times, and the daily occurrences around us, show that woman can be quite as criminal, quite as fiendish, quite as bent on iniquity, as man, and all the sickly stuff about the poor, weak creature, when she has committed a crime, is simple degradation of her, when those very men who would pardon every female convict declare her infinitely superior to man in point of morality. Let us be done with this hypocricy; let us honor woman as our equal, wholly and fully, in morality, in religion, in responsibility and in immortality; let us truly honor her, and in order to do this, among other things, let us abolish civil suits asking for damages for breach of promise, and punish the female criminals. It ought be claimed as a right by women themselves to be held responsible. – E. L.

[E. L., “The ‘Degradation of Woman,” The New York Times (N. Y.), Jul. 29, 1869, p. 5]


* “Degradation of Woman.” – A phrase apparently popularized in 1848 by American Quaker feminist Lucretia Coffin Mott (1793-1880): “The world has never yet seen a truly great nation because in the very degradation of women the very foundations of life are poisoned at their source.”

** Baxter – Richard Baxter; 1615 – 1691; American Puritan theologian promoted the idea of individual agency.


Sunday, January 1, 2012

Is This Website Misogynistic?

It is common for people who have been subjected to “gender” theories to judge critiques of misandry and discussions of anti-social behavior in individual or organized groups women to respond to such discussions in a knee-jerk fashion. If one criticizes feminism then one is a “misogynist.” Therefore it is not surprising that The Unknown History of MISANDRY is often left off lists of resources on crime and criminality. The word “misandry” is scary. To link to us is to risk being labeled misogynist. This was understood when the sites name was selected, yet it was decided to use the politically incorrect term regardless.

In an effort to help those who might question our attitudes toward women in general – to answer the query “Do you hate women” – the following case is offered as evidence to assist in forming ones own answer.

This case featured here represents – out of thousands of horrifying criminal cases studied over a long period of time – the crime that most haunts this writer. It was committed by a man. Nobody accuses men of being “inherently non-violent,” or of being members of “gender oppression” who are automatically lacking in responsibility for their own actions, of being persons without agency. But cultural Marxism makes such claims for women as a class. That is why the website was created: to give evidence that can serve to counter the indoctrination of “gender” theorizers. For this writer crimes are disturbing regardless of the sex of the perpetrator and the sufferings of the victims are pitiful regardless of the “social context.” Nevertheless, the following crime stands apart in the subjective mind of the editor of UHoM, and the criminal in this instance happens to be of the male sex.


FULL TEXT: Franklin, Ind. — On Father’s Day [1999], Amy Shanabarger found her chubby-cheeked infant son, Tyler, face-down and dead in his crib.

Two days later — just hours after the tot’s funeral — Ronald Shanabarger told his wife he’d killed their son. The next day he gave police a confession saying that not only did he kill the boy, he planned the crime even before the child was conceived as a way of exacting revenge against his wife.

Tyler didn’t die of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome as the coroner had ruled, Shanabarger said. He confessed to suffocating the 7-month-old with plastic wrap.

He said it was revenge because Amy, before they were married, had refused to cut short a vacation trip to comfort him when his father died in 1996.

“Shanabarger said he planned to make Amy feel the way he did when his father died. He married her, got her pregnant, allowed time for her to bond with the child, and then took his (boy’s) life,” according to an affidavit prosecutors filed to support a murder charge.

Shanabarger, 30, who begged officers to shoot him after he confessed on Wednesday, was charged with murder. He is being held without bail pending a court appearance Monday for an initial hearing. An attorney will be appointed for him at the hearing.

Johnson County Prosecutor Lance Hamner said he hasn’t decided whether to seek the death penalty.

Shanabarger said in his confession that on the evening of June 19, he wrapped plastic wrap around his son’s head and face, then left the boy’s nursery to get something to eat and brush his teeth.

Twenty minutes later, he said, he returned, removed the plastic and placed Tyler face down in the crib before he went off to bed.

Mrs. Shanabarger, 29, had been working that night at her job as a cashier at a grocery store. When she came home she went straight to bed, assuming that Tyler was asleep, and found the boy’s body the next morning.

Shanabarger, who worked at a tire retreading center, told police he confessed because the image of his son’s face, flat and purplish from rigor mortis, haunted him.

Since then, he’s confessed at least three times, Police Chief Harry Furrer said in an interview Sunday.

Each time, the story has been the same — that he hatched his plan because he was enraged by his then-girlfriend’s refusal to cut short a cruise and return home after his father’s death in October 1996.

The Shanabargers were married the following May.

Detectives who have interviewed relatives confirmed that Shanabarger had long resented Amy’s refusal to cut the cruise short, Furrer said. The Rev. Randy Maynard, a volunteer chaplain for Franklin police, accompanied police to the couple’s home in this town south of Indianapolis on Father’s Day.

While most parents of children who die from the death syndrome are weeping and consoling each other when authorities arrive, Maynard said Shanabarger was cold, distant and offering no comfort to his sobbing wife.

[“Murder Suspect Says He Fathered His Son to Kill Him,” syndicated (AP), Pacific Stars and Stripes (Okinawa, Japan), Jun. 29, 1999, p. 8]


Conclusion: This website is anti-crime and anti-decadence.


Fake History: Deceptive Book About Child Abduction in America

The author of this book lies about the past to promote an orthodox progressive collectivist future. Paula S. Fass practices the Orwellian art of sending the truth down the memory hole so that a new bogus account of human history can be foisted upon the public. Prof. Fass is a kidnapper of memory!◄

“Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America,” by Professor Paula S. Fass is the only study yet available on the subject. The book is useful for the accurate information which it contains despite that the fact that it also contains an abundance of inaccurate “facts,” distortions, and willful omissions - all which support the author’s ideological prejudices (which clearly lean heavily toward utopian/collectivist child-rearing by bureaucracies).

The book’s errors are legion; therefore only a small sample can be mentioned in a brief review. Fass claims the Philadelphia Charley Ross kidnapping of 1874 is America’s first ransom kidnapping of a child (or the first “fully constructed” case, whatever is meant by that). In truth, the Pool case of 1819 qualifies as perhaps the first nationally known case (date of kidnapping – May 20, 1819, Baltimore, Md.). The Pool case does not, however, suit the author’s ideological purposes. Nancy Gamble and Marie Thomas, the kidnappers of little 20-month-old Margaret Pool were females who physically abused their tiny victim.

Throughout the book, Professor Fass makes broad claims that are not supported with a lick of evidence. One of these false claims is her generalization that women are seldom kidnappers for ransom, sadistic purposes, child labor purposes (prostitution, entertainment, servants). This is untrue.

Deceptive rhetoric abounds in “Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America.” In the book’s introductory chapter, the “myth” of Gypsy kidnapping is compared to the Medieval “blood libel” against the Jews, allowing the reader to get the impression that the myth of Jewish kidnappers for child sacrifice and the myth of Gypsy child kidnapping are similar in type and origin. In truth, “blood libel” is based on prejudice, while the “myth” of Gypsy kidnapping is based on fact. Gypsies have long practiced child kidnapping and a great many documented cases exist – throughout the 19th century well into the late middle 20th century.

A number of the author’s claims regarding the sub-category of child abduction, parental kidnapping, are outright fabrications: such as the assertions that parental kidnapping was not taken seriously in the early 20th century (utterly false: see “Love Proves Superior to Courts Decrees,” nationally syndicated, incl. Marble Rock Press (Io.), Dec. 12, 1907; “Parental Love That Laughs at Court Decree,” nationally syndicated, incl. Jun. 11, 1910, Evening Press (Sheboygen, Wi.)); and further that during the 20s and 30s only cases involving rich and famous were reported by the press (utterly false). The fact is that already in the early 1900s, parental kidnapping was the subject of long newspaper articles which treated the phenomenon as a serious social problem.

One of the more egregious distortions to be found in “Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America,” involves the 1874 Ross case. It deals with the fact that before a ransom demand had been made, police had begun searching for the missing Charlie in the Italian neighborhood. Fass tells her readers that the measure was taken based on “unsavory” stereotypes. The facts was that at the time Philadelphia was known to house a large population of “padrones” who had left New York to escape prosecution there. Padrones were child slavers, who imported (kidnapped or purchased) children from Italy for the purpose of begging under the control of their masters. Many children were tortured and even mutilated (to make them more pitiful sights in order to attract alms). The scandal was so great that New York, in direct response to the Padrone racket, amended their kidnapping law to cover foreign-born victims.

Fass, because of her predilection for applying present-day of moral preferences toward ethnic groups (ie: “politically correct” politics) ends up falsifying history and consequently cruelly diminishes the actual struggles of minority people. In the case of Italian-American child kidnapping of the later “Black Hand” period – also ignored by Fass - it was honest Italian immigrants who were preyed upon by Italian criminals. It was not unusual for poor parents to be victims of ransom demands of whatever sum was “appropriate” for the working class. The suffering of these innocent Italian victims was immense, involving a huge number of crimes over a period of decades.

Professor Fass, by pretending that 1874 was the beginning of ransom kidnapping, the author manages to “historically cleanse” the rich and important history of child kidnapping of the 1830s-1860s, a period in which ransom child kidnapping gangs operated in Philadelphia, New York and elsewhere by erase inconvenient truths that violate her politically correct agenda. Likewise glossed over  the issue of the kidnapping of the pre-Civil War children of free black parents -- despite the fact that the phenomenon was not absolutely separate from the other forms of child kidnapping that occurred concurrently.

In the book’s front material the author discloses that the book’s writing was generously supported by a number of research grants, yet the final product proves that little research was actually done. The writing is quite good, but the scholarship is reprehensibly shoddy and its tendentiousness – which fosters ignorance – is dangerous.

It is an alarming fact that of the several long academic reviews of the book that have been published none even so much at hints that the “facts” that Fass reports in her book might need more looking into (let alone that her endnotes routinely fail to support her claims with evidence). Apart from some disagreements concerning the interpretive approach (rather than questioning the factual data per se), her colleagues swallow the falsehoods –hook, line and sinker – without even a whimper of dissent.


A Small Sample Early Child Kidnapping Cases in America:

FULL TEXT: A Lost Child. – Some few weeks since we observed in the Philadelphia papers, an advertisement signifying that a young child had been stolen out of a respectable family in the place of mendicant woman, (for the purpose we fancy of a more effectually exciting charity). Ever since that time, until within a few days, the parents have been truly distressed. After going to every expense in searching through all Pennsylvania, New-York, and most parts of New-Jersey, they were fortunate enough to find their lost offspring in Sussex county in this state. The wretch of as woman has made her escape.

[“A Lost Child,” Ostego Herald (N.Y.), Apr. 1, 1809, p. 3]

FULL TEXT: Oct. 25 – Diabolical Act. – On Thursday last an act was committed in this city, which for its atrocity, finds itself almost unparalleled.

A little girl, named Susan, aged about five years, the daughter of Mr. Benj. Farioli, artificial florist, who resides at 33, Chatham-row, took her departure at 9 o’clock for the purpose of going to school, kept by Mrs. Temperence Ely, at No. 9, Frankfort-st. The child’s return was naturally expected at noon, but did not appear, nor did she come home all night. In the morning the uneasiness of the parents can be more easily conceived than expressed, as she was deemed a most innocent and engaging child by all who knew her. An advertisement was prepared, mentioning the time of her leaving home, her dress, &c. and very humanely inserted by the respective editors of most of our daily papers; but the child was neither seen nor heard of till Saturday evening about 8 o’clock, when Mrs. Bachie, an intimate acquaintance of the family, happened to be in Chatham-street, near Mr. Lolliard’s, was called by her name two or three times by the child, whose dress, however, was so metamorphosed, that if she had not recollected the voice she would not have known her. Her chip hat was cut all round and her Vandyke changed – a cap and a large ruffle made of muslin put round her neck in such a manner as almost entirely to hide her face, and her petticoat was taken away. Her little hands were tied together at the wrists by a rope; there were likewise 2 ropes round her body, the one under her frock and the other above it. The lady procured a penknife from a gentleman passing by, and cut the ropes with which her hands were tied. At this period two black women came up, one of whom, taking the child by the hand, wanted to take her away; but upon the gentleman asking her what she wanted with the child they both took to their heels. The account which the child, who is very intelligent for one of her age, gives of this very extraordinary transaction is as follows: -- That when she had along as far as the corner of Beekman-street, and was standing by some barrels by Mr. Houston’s grocery, she was accosted by a coloured woman, who gave her some sugar candy, and coaxed her to accompany her, promising her sweetmeats, play things, &c; that she carried her somewhere in the country, where she gave her apples, and had her under some trees; that she afterwards took her back to the city, where she was made to sleep in the same bed with the said black woman, and that along side of the bed there were several hogs. Upon this fiend leaving her apartment the next morning, she tied the child’s hands, and bound her with a cord to the bed-post, to which she continued tied till Saturday evening, when taking advantage of the absence of her prosecatrix, she ground the cords asunder and made her escape. It is probable, however, that if she had not fallen in with Mrs. Bachio at the very time she did, she would have been re-taken by the said two wenches. During her confinement, which was for three days and two nights, she ate nothing but some apples and sweet things; and upon her crying for her mother, she was compelled to be still by severe whipping, and a threat that she should be sent to Bridewell [prison in New York City]. The woman had on a blue frock; and she had a daughter named Charlotte. It is supposed that the place of her confinement was in Orange-street, or somewhere in its vicinity. Pains are now taking [sic] to find out the residence of the person, who, it is hoped, will be discovered and brought to that punishment to which a wretch who could commit so infernal a deed, is so well entitled.

[“Diabolical Act.” (from New York Commercial Advertiser), Connecticut Herald (New Haven, Ct.), Oct. 31, 1815, p. 2]

FULL TEXT: A Child of the Subscriber named SUSAN FARIOLI, aged about 5 years, left her home on yesterday morning, from No. 33 Chatham street, with the intention of going to School in Frankfort street, and she has not been seen or heard of since that time. She has on a straw hat with a blue ribbon and a blue frock with little white specks on it. The distress of the parents upon this occasion can scarcely be conceived, and it is not doubted than any person who may know any thing concerning the Child, will give information to the afflicted father. – BENJAMIN FARIOLI, Artificial Florist, No. 33 Chatham st.

[“To the Friends of Humanity.” (advertisement), Oct. 21, 1815, p. 3]

FULL TEXT: In Chautauqua County, N. Y., a man calling his name James Jaquith, has been convicted of stealing a female child, eight years since, using it to secure pity in begging about the country. It was stolen two years and eight months old and has now been found by its parents, when near eleven years old.

[“Child Stealing.” (From N. Y. Inquirer), Christian Watchman (Boston, Ma.), Aug. 4, 1826, p. 143]

FULL TEXT: The following particulars, which have been furnished us by Dr. Cyrenius Chapin, we publish in the hope that may lead to the restoration of the child in question to its parents, from whom it has in all probability been stolen.

A woman apparently about 35 years of age, calling herself Stevenson, was arrested here a few weeks ago since, for plundering a house in which she had been employed as a servant. She brought to town with her a girl of about six years of age, whom she called her daughter. After her arrest,. The child was placed in the poor-house. She manifested much fear and dread of her reputed mother, and to a woman in the poor-house, who has gained her confidence, she stated she is five years of age, that she gave her name as Mary Ann Stevenson, by order of the woman who brought her here, as she had threatened her with some direful calamity, if she gave up any other name. She says when at home she lived near a great lake, where there were many houses, her father’s name was Hook and her mother Mrs. Hook; and that her father sometimes laid bricks, and sometime plastered walls. She can give no further account of herself, nor does she disclose by what means she shame into the possession of the woman, Stevenson. The child has light hair, and rather deep blue eyes, looked cautiously from under her eyebrows, as if in fear, and seems loth to speak of herself, from an apprehension of punishment. – Her hair and skin have both the dull colour contracted by exposure.

In a trunk from the woman, who is now in jail here, were found the papers and articles mentioned below, by which it is hoped some clue to her history may be obtained viz

A knight templar’s apron and sash; a letter directed to Mr. James Israel, Cincinnati, Ohio, dated City of St. Louis, Mo. 19th May, 1828,  and signed Phineas Herbert; an agreement dated 4th May 1820 between David Gilmore, of Franklin, County of Norfolk, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and James Campbell and Hollis Bond, of Brewer, in the county of Penebscot; a promissory note to Jas. T. Prother, an order, made by Thos. T. Spear, for $550; a certificate that Mrs. Grave and child had their bill paid at the City Hotel, and a small sum collected from the numbers of Columbian lodge No. 58, and others of the fraternity, dated Frederickstown, Md. and signed N. S. Turbutt, S. W. with this line at the bottom, “I hope the widow and orphan will not be neglected, N. T.”; a paper dated Baltimore, 16th of March, 1829, Cassin Lodge No. 45, granted Mrs. Graves, believed to be the widow of brother mason, five dollars, and procured a passage for her and child to New Castle, on her way to the eastward, signed Samuel Koerl, Treasurer; a paper purporting that Mrs. Graves had received some relief, under the belief that she was worthy, dated Washington, Feb. 17, 1829, and signed ‘Truman Bardy S. D.’ a paper dated Washington, March 3, 1829 directed at the top to Mr. Valentine Geney, that Mrs. Graves the bearer, states that she is the widow of a brother mason, and that in consequence of that statement they have given their mite, and hope he will aid her homeward, signed John B. Griffith, John Dragg; a paper dated Lewisten Nov. 9, 1823, signed T. B. Moore and directed to Wm. Hughes, Lockport. This paper is not entire, but seems to purport that the bearer had been in search of a little girl stolen from her two years before with all her property, from a steam boat; that having found her child she was then on her return home to Sackets Harbor, that her fare was paid to Rochester and recommending her to charity; four or five tracts of the American Tract Society; newspapers of various places; several linen sheets marked “Nazareth Hall,” with indelible ink; several sheets and pillow cases marked in like manner, M. W. Wilson, No. 13, Walter Wills No. 41, D. Saint, No. 8 and 12; some marked H. H. &c.

[“Stolen Child,” Norwalk Reporter (Oh.) (originally published in Buffalo Journal, Oct. 20), Oct. 31, 1829, p. 2]

FULL TEXT: “Kidnapping. – A child, a girl of seven years of age, was stolen from its parents at Covington, Ky., on Tuesday evening last, between four and five o’clock. The father of the child, Mr. Remington, offered a reward of one thousand dollars for its recovery and the apprehension of the person who stole it. A gentleman passing Sixth-street, near the Fly Market, observing a child crying, questioned it as to the cause. He was informed of the fact of its being the girl abducted from its parents and returned it to them in a very short time, having met the mother on Main street, in search of it. Parker, the name of the kidnapper, was apprehended and lodged in the Newport jail. He confessed taking the child. The object is supposed to have been to obtain a reward.”

[“Kidnapping.” Western Christian Advocate (Cincinnati, Oh.), Oct. 2, 1835, p. 91; (reprinted from Cincinnati Gazette, Sep. 24)]

FULL TEXT: A lady of our acquaintance living in Cincinnati who was for a long time a constant reader of the (Nashville) Cumberland Presbyterean, gives us the following account as read by her in that journal about eighteen months ago: –

As Mr. Bullock, residing in or near Nashville, and counted among the more wealthy and fashionable of the community, had a sweet little daughter, named Caroline, of about four years old. Her early education had been so well attended to, that she had already learned to read with tolerable facility. She was kidnapped from the premises of her parents, and, after being discolored so as to pass for a mulatto, sold at a distance of only forty miles from her father’s house as a SLAVE. The distracted father offered a reward of Five Hundred dollars for the discovery of his little darling – but for four months every search was unavailing. Meantime,, the discoloration of the child’s skin had disappeared, and the fraud that was practiced on the buyer (to whom no participation in it was imputed) clearly revealed, and she restored to the arms of her rejoicing parents.

Reader, have you a little Caroline to dandle on your knee or have their little arms entwined around your neck, when you come home at evening from your daily toil? Can you describe the keenness of your anguish should you be called to suffer as Mr. Bullock was? Can you, when you fancy the case yours, think without horror and detestation of a system that robs then thousand fathers and mothers as affectionate as you are of their Carolines? Go and think well of little Caroline.

[“Kidnapping of Caroline, A White Child,” The Philanthropist (Cincinnati, Ohio), Mar. 24, 1837, p. 2]

FULL TEXT: KIDNAPPING CHILDREN. – The Philadelphia Ledger states that there is a band of miscreants in that city, who kidnap children and detain them to secure a reward for their restoration. They await their opportunity, and when the child is seen for a moment alone, they seduce it away, and keep it until a sufficient sum is offered, when, affecting a previous ignorance of its residence, they return the infant to its parents and claim the reward of their benevolence. It is unnecessary to comment on the cruelty, the villainy of an act like this. The wretch who could be guilty of it, is beyond the influence of conscience as reproof, and would cut a throat with as little remorse as he would divide an apple.

[“Kidnapping Children,” The Baltimore Sun (Md.), Apr. 3, 1839. p. 2]

FULL TEXT: The Boston Bee publishes the particulars of a most bold and outrageous case of kidnapping in Steep Falls, Standish, Me. Last Friday noon, as the son of Dr. J. P. Weeks, a bright, handsome little boy, four years old, was going to school, a horse and chaise passed through the village, and just as it reached the place where were several children, two women got out and seized Dr. Weeks’ boy, and taking him into the chaise, drove off – Dr. W. did not hear of the circumstances till near dark when he went in pursuit of the kidnappers.

It appeared that the woman drove to Gorham, 15 miles, where they took a steamboat to St. Lawrence, and arrived in Boston Saturday morning, and took the afternoon train for Springfield. From thence they proceeded to Dalton, in Berkshire Co. From this they traveled six miles on foot, and in the night, the boy in the mean time suffering extreme physical agony. Dr. weeks traced them in company with an officer, and found the kidnappers with the kidnapped boy, in a house two miles from any neighbors, in a wild and mountainous region, over the New York line.

The women refused to surrender the boy, and resisted the officer most pertinaciously. In fact they fought like desperadoes, and in the encounter the officer was much injured, and the clothes of the women were nearly torn from their bodies in the melee. They were finally taken into custody, and conveyed to the county jail, where they will remain till a requisition is forwarded from the Governor of Maine to the Governor of New York. The kidnappers carried their charge over six hundred miles. One of the women is about 50 years old, and the other is about 25. The six miles they travelled on foot was over a range of Green Mountains. Their names are suppressed at the request of Dr. Weeks. The mother of the child was nearly insane from the loss which ere this has been changed to joy. – This is one of the most novel cases of kidnapping that has occurred of late years.

[“Outrageous Case of Kidnapping,” State Gazette (Trenton, N. J.), Jul. 1, 1852, p. 2]

FULL TEXT: A daughter of Mr. John Charlton of Louisville, Ky., was abducted by two abandoned women [euphemism for “prostitute”], who have since been arrested, tried and sentenced to the penitentiary for five years. No traces of the child have been received.

[“Abduction.” Daily Evening Transcript (Boston, Ma.), Mar. 6, 1848, p. 2]

FULL TEXT: CHILD STEALING, the New York papers say, is practiced to a great extent in that city. Probably, on the average, two children a week are abducted from their homes while playing on the sidewalk, and are detained until the afflicted parents offer a reward for them, when the kidnappers bring their little victims to light and receive the money.

[“Child Stealing,” The Daily Ohio Statesman (Columbus, Oh.), Feb. 27, 1857, p. 4]

FULL TEXT: It will be remembered that a few days since a child eight months old, belonging to Mr. George Rhode, of No. 15 Avenue A, was stolen from it sister’s lap by some unknown woman, and taken away to parts unknown. Mr. Rhode’s daughter, aged about 9 years, was sitting on the stoop of her residence on the afternoon in question, with her little brother in her lap. A woman came along, and fondling with the baby a moment, required the little nurse to step into a baker’s shop, next door, and buying some crackers, offering a 25 cent piece with which to pay. The little girl at first declined to go, because she had to hold the baby. The strange woman said: “O, I will take care of the baby,” taking the child in her arms at the same time. The little girl then went into the baker’s and purchased the cakes. On coming out again, her baby was missing, as was also the woman in whose charge she had left him. She ran wildly about the street, returned and informed her mother, who renewed the search. The neighbors and the Police were notified, but all inquiries failed to reveal the whereabouts of the stolen child or the kidnapper.

Yesterday Alburtis Fritz, a constable at Strattonford, L. I., appeared at the Seventeeth Ward Stationhouse, with the kidnapped child, who looked well and hearty and not at all discontented at his forced absence from home. Constable Fritz had with him, also, a young woman of 16 years of age, whom he introduced as the person who had stolen the child of Mr. Rhode. Mr. Fritz stated that he found the young woman and child in the vicinity of Flushing under circumstances that convinced him something was wrong, and that on instituting inquiry to become convinced that the child was none other than that stolen by Mr. Rhode, in Avenue C, New-York – an account of which he had seen in the newspapers.

The young woman, on being questioned, did not deny her guilt. She gave her name as Bertha Burkrekeil, and that her age was 16 years. She stated that she had been seduced on Long Island, by a man in good circumstances, by whom she had a child, which she immediately made away with [murdered?]. Seeing her seducer a few weeks since, she asked him for aid, stating that she had given birth to a child of which he was the father. Her story was treated as doubtful. She was asked, “Where is the child ten?” She replied, “I have it at nurse in New York.” Then show it to me,” said the father, “and I will give you the money you ask for.” Here the interview ended. Bertha, wishing to obtain possession of the money, promised to come straightaway to New-York, resolved to either beg, borrow, or steal a child, to shew to and convince her seducer. She looked a long while, and in many streets, before she found an opportunity to procure one of suitable age. At length, while in Avenue C, she managed to kidnap the child of Mr. Rhode, in the manner above described.

The child was restored to its overjoyed mother, and Bertha was locked up to await an examination before one of the magistrates.

[“Police Intelligence. – The Late Curious Case of Child-Kidnapping – The Child Restored to Its Parents – Arrest of the Kidnapper – A Strange Avowal.” New York Times (N.Y.), Jun. 15, 1857, p. 5]

FULL TEXT: A girl about fourteen years old is now residing in the family of Peter Dean, at Jeromeville, Ashland County, Ohio, who was abducted about five years ago by a band of gypsies at Fort Wayne, Ind., and escaped from them a few weeks ago. She says her father’s name is Samuel Grimes, and she is anxious to obtain some information concerning his whereabouts.

[“Items,” Dubuque Herald (Io.), Oct. 10, 1866, p. 1]

FULL TEXT: A little girl belonging to J. Roach, of Albany, was stolen by a band of gypsies who pitched their tents near that city, some two years ago. All attempts to recover her at that time were fruitless. A few days since the same band took up their residence near Tivoli Hollow [near Albany] , where a boy who knew the lost child, saw and recognized her. He at once gave information, and the child was recovered and restored to its parents.

[Untitled, New-Hampshire Sentinel (Keene, N.H.), Aug. 8, 1867, p. 1]

FULL TEXT: On last Sunday evening, while a lad about 12 years of age (for the sake of  the parents the name is suppressed.) was returning from church with his people, who reside on Halsted-street, near the South Branch bridge, ne ran ahead of the rest a considerable distance. When out of sight of his parents, a man in a light wagon called him into the road, and when the boy had come within an arm’s length of the vehicle, he was grasped by the collar of his jacket by the man and placed in the vehicle, which then rapidly proceeded on its way. They drove until daylight, when the wagon came to a halt before a double house, and subsequently transferred to the basement, where to his astonishment he found fifteen or sixteen boys of nearly his own age already congregated.

There were, besides, a colored woman and child, the former apparently serving in the capacity of servant. The moment the boy was taken into the basement a plaster over his mouth, which was only removed at meal times, and by means of the application of warm water.

The boy remained there in the condition described until Thursday morning, when, at an early hour, before daylight, he effected his escaped his escape by breaking through the window. As soon as he reached the outside he climbed the nearest tree. The noise he made by the breaking of the window awoke those in the in the house, and the most determined search was instantly instituted. Meanwhile the lad kept perfectly quiet, and while search was made afar he remained hear the house. While the search was yet going on, a freight train came in sight (the track passing near the house,) and the moment it was observed by the boy he left his perch, succeeded in reaching the train, was taken on board, and by this means reached the city. When the boy reached the train, the plaster was still on his mouth, and he was relieved from his uncomfortable situation by his rescuers. Yesterday morning Sgt. BRISCOE, of the Twelfth-street Police Station, was informed of the affair, and the Police are now engaged in ferreting out the mystery. Two officers, accompanied by the boy, left by the railroad by which the boy returned to the city, yesterday afternoon, and it is probable that ere this the parties guilty of this outrage are in the hands of the law. It is feared, however, that  the premises will be found deserted. The lad, whose statement of the adventure has just been recorded, is extremely bright and intelligent, and the Police place great reliance on his story. As early as Monday morning the Police were notified of the lad’s disappearance, and the case was receiving their attention when the lost one returned. In the opinion of the Police, the fifteen or sixteen lads congregated in the house were there as subjects for doctors. This is almost too horrible to be true, and yet no other reasonable version can be readily discovered.

In London, England, at one time, a great number of boys were sacrificed in the interest of science, and in Cincinnati, a number of years ago, great excitement was occasioned from a similar cause. It is devoutly to be hoped that this mystery, when brought to light, will not realize the worst fears now entertained.

[“One of Chicago’s Horrible Mysteries – Kidnapping of Children.” The New York Times (N.Y.), Aug. 19, 1868, p. 5]

FULL TEXT: Our criminal calendars very rarely reveal charges of kidnapping, and most of such cases are the abduction of wealthy parents, with the view to obtaining rewards for the restoration of the lost children. A case came before Judge Dowling yesterday, at the Tombs, which the presence of every reasonable motive for the alleged kidnapping envelopes in a veil of mystery, as well as makes more than ordinarily interesting. The circumstances of the case as brought to light in the proceedings before the court are as follows: --

Mrs. Eliza Kelve is a widow, living at No. 129 Washington street: she is a German woman, about twenty-five years old and quite handsome, and has two fine-looking children, the oldest being five years and the youngest eleven months old. Her husband died about eighteen months ago, and having left her destitute she has been compelled she has been compelled to go out and wash and scrub and do other menial work for the support of herself and children. On Tuesday morning she went out to do a day’s work, leaving the two children at home. Shortly after noon Mary Ann Crowley, living in the same house, came where she was at work and told her that an old woman had taken her child away. Mrs. Kelve at once returned to her room and found, sure enough, the baby, her “little dove” as she called him – and he was as bright-looking as he was little – was gone. Her five year old child, the custodian of the baby, was nearly as tearful as the mother, and could give no other explanation than that an old woman took away the baby. Everybody knows how mothers will hurry from station house to station house in quest of their lost children. Mrs. Kelve hurried to all the station houses in the vicinity and at once reported the stealing of her child, and having been assured by every policeman she met that he would keep a sharp look out for old women in quest of the missing infant. They went through street after street and lane after lane, and up stairs and down stairs, and into dwellings and saloons and stores and shops and all sorts of places. At length she came upon the object of her search at the corner of Washington and Rector streets. She called officer Gorman, of the Twenty-seventh precinct, who at once arrested the woman and returned to Mrs. Kelve her child. The prisoner also had another child, a boy about two years old, with her. On being brought into court the prisoner gave her name as Margaret Barry.

“How came you by this woman’s child?” Judge Dowling asked her.

“I found it in the street,” she answered.

“She took the child from my room, so my little girl says,” interposed the mother, which statement was confirmed by the child.

“What were you going to do with the child” pursued the judge.

“Take care of it.”


“At No. 10 Washington street, where I live.”

“Have you a husband?”

“No; I am a poor widow.”

“Didn’t you steal that little boy, too, you have got with you?”

“No; he is my boy.”

“He don’t look at all like you.”

“He is my child, any way.”

“I am not so sure about that: a woman that will steal another.”

“I didn’t steal him.”

“We’ll see about that by and by,” pursued the Judge. “How long after your child was stolen before you recovered it?” replied Mrs. Kelve.

“It is rarely my sympathies and indignation are so aroused as in a case like this,” said Judge. “I will commit this woman for trial for kidnapping your child, and meantime will find out whether the other child belongs to her.”

“This is my child, this is my child,” pleaded the prisoner, “don’t take him from me,” and she clasped the child with a fixed determination that nothing should separate them.

The prisoner was committed in default of $500 bail. She was sent into a cell inside, the little boy being also sent with her.

[“Charge of Kidnapping. – An Alleged Kidnapper Charged with Stealing a Child Eleven Months Old – Two Children Found with Her – Scene at the Police Court.” The New York Herald (N.Y.), Jun. 10, 1869, p. 5]

FULL TEXT: The Kansas City Times gives an interesting account of the recent recovery of a little girl who was supposed to have been drowned in 1857, by falling into Ohio river, near Louisville. The child, then about two years old, had wandered away from her home, and the only trace of her that ever be discovered was her bonnet, found lying on the river bank. Eight years afterwards the parents removed to St. Louis and other children were added to the family. Quite recently, however, the father received an anonymous letter from Kansas City, urging him to come to that place immediately wished to find her daughter whom he had supposed was drowned thirteen years ago. On reaching the place designated in the letter the father was received by a woman apparently on her death-bed, and the little girl of fifteen, who was pointed out to him as his “drowned child.” The woman had stolen the little girl to revenge herself for some fancied wrong and then removed in Cincinnati, where she had remained until within the last six months. Finding that she had not long to live, the woman resolved to make reparation and restore the child, who, however, had always been treated kindly. The little girl begged her father not to separate her from her supposed mother, and the three returned to St. Louis in company.

[“A Lost Child.” Daily State Gazette (Trenton, N.J.), Aug. 5, 1870, p. 1]

FULL TEXT: Yesterday afternoon a case of child-stealing occurred in New Jersey, which caused considerable excitement in the northern part of the city. A little girl, three years age, the daughter of Mr. John Harper, who resides in Prspect-Street, was carried away while at play with other children by a stranger, who came suddenly upon the group and seized the brightest one among them. The screams of the child and of its frightened playmates attracted the attention of Mr. Harper, who was in the back-yard. He started in pursuit of the kidnapper, and was living in the neighborhood. Officer Doyne led the party and chased the robber out on the meadows of the city. Finally, the latter dropped the child near the Tobacco Inspection, and ran northward to Hoboken. The child was returned to its parents, but the kidnapper escaped arrest.

[“A Child Kidnapped in New Jersey City – A Chase After the Thief.” The New-York Times (N.Y.), May 8, 1870, p. 8]

FULL TEXT: Wednesday night a bold attempt was made to kidnap a nine-year old son of Mr. S. Wolf, a wealthy citizen of New York, by some unknown party who threw a cloak over the child to prevent his screams from being heard. By a hard struggle the boy escaped. It was, doubtless, another attempt to extort money for a child’s recovery, which is getting common in New York.

[Untitled, Alton Weekly Telegraph (Il.), Jan. 13, 1871, p. 1]

FULL TEXT: There is a rough suspicion growing up that an organized gang exists in the city, the object of which is to entice away or abduct young girls for vile purposes. Within the past month, at least three girls, about 14 and fifteen years of age, have left their homes, and although two of them have returned, the third is still absent, and supposed to be in Cincinnati. In the instance spoken of, the parents are in very humble circumstances, and this, coupled with the natural desire on their part to cover up the missteps of their children, has prevented the details from being generally known.

On Friday afternoon last, the daughter of a gentleman residing on Indiana avenue, about 16 years old, suddenly disappeared, the last trace of her being lost at the depot or. the evening of that clay. From the company in which she was seen at that time it is surmised that she has gone to St. Louis.

Yesterday, the 15-year old daughter of a man doing business on South Illinois street returned voluntarily from Chicago, whither she went three weeks ago in company with a noted cyprian of this city. There are well authenticated reports of at least two more instances of a somewhat similar character, but for obvious reasons the names of the parties in these dreadful affairs cannot be made public.

Chief Paul was down to Shelbyville yesterday to learn something about the woman who induced Louise Weighorst to leave home on last Tuesday. The station agent informed him that he first noticed them in the depot about 7 o'clock at night. She sent them to the Morriston house, but they were refused admittance and returned to the depot. When the agent returned on Wednesday morning the woman had gone, and Louise, fearing to stay alone, walked all the way home. Paul says he is certain the woman is Rosa Rote, who was lately in jail for stealing.

Tue missing school girl, whose books were discovered in a lumber-yard, an account of which was published in the Journal, was found yesterday afternoon, and taken to the Orphan home by Mrs. Hadley.

The police are investigating all these cases, and some startling developments may be looked for.

[“The Infamous Supply Trade.- Enticing Young Girls from their Homes. A Raid on Indianapolis Families.” (From the Indianapolis Journal, April 13.), The Janesville Gazette (Wi.), Apr. 24, 1871, p. 2]

FULL TEXT: A pretty little Italian girl, aged about five years, and named Rea Taliata, was kid-napped Saturday afternoon under peculiar circumstances. Her mother, a poor blind woman, who earns a precarious living by selling matches and other minor articles, was sitting with her daughter in front of the Centre Market plying her vocation, when some unknown woman passing by.

[“The City” (section), Untitled, Daily Critic (Washington, D.C.), , Dec. 2, 1872, p. 4]

NOTE: This article establishes the context for the police dragnet of 1874 for the kidnapped Charley Ross, in which numerous Gypsy camps were searched

FULL TEXT: Some people would be greatly astonished if told that in the present year of grace, and within half a day’s journey from New York, the kidnapping of children has been frequently practiced by a band of Gypsies, who, with their headquarters in Lehigh Valley [50 miles from Philadelphia], have been scouring its surrounding country, picking up stray children or stray horses as the opportunity offered. Such, however, is the fact, only within the past month a case having occurred near Easton [60 miles from Philadelphia]. The child stolen was of very tender years, and, in company of its nurse, had been out among the hills with which Easton is surrounded. While here a swarthy Gypsy woman  approached the nurse and asked permission to tell the latter her fortune. The Gypsy poured out a string of meaningless nonsense, mingled with the usual allusions to dark men and light men, marriage and death. The servant girl listened entranced while the woman was speaking, and when she had concluded, turning round to look for the child, she was horrified to find it gone. She had seen no one approach while the Gypsy was taking round to look for the child, she was horrified to find it gone. She had seen no one approach while the Gypsy was talking, but as the road suddenly turned near where her fortune was told, it would have been easy for one to have crept cautiously along without having been perceived. She returned to Easton, and her tale plunged the household into deepest distress. Rewards were offered, the police act to work, the Gypsy camps searched, but for some days without avail. The child was eventually recovered, but not until a large sum of money had been expended and hope almost lost.

Your correspondent, hearing of the circumstances, on last Thursday determined to visit the Gypsy camp.

I inquired of various people whom I met about the Gypsies, but could obtain no authentic information about them further than that they were quartered in some woods about fifteen miles from Allentown, in a southeasterly direction. After some trouble a Pennsylvania Dutchman was induced to accompany me, and about eight o’clock we started for the camp. The morning was beautiful after the storm of the preceding night, the grass smelt sweetly, the birds were gaily singing, and I had opportunity to study the camp and the persons it contained. There were thirteen in all – six men, four woman and three children. Two of the women were old, toothless and repulsive-looking; the other two were young and quite good-looking. The men were swarthy and powerful fellows, with bronzed countenances and bright cunning eyes. I learned from a man who seemed to be a leader among them a great many particulars of their mode of life. The band had Wintered in Philadelphia, and at first opening of Summer had started out on their annual tour. They remain away until the severity of the weather drives them to take refuge in the cities again, and so their lives are spent from year to year.

They are very fond of trading in horses, and when they cannot procure animals in any other way, they have no hesitation in stealing them. Sometimes the farmers retaliate, and if a Gypsy’s horse strays away from the enclosure, it is very rarely allowed to return again. The band were greatly excited over the loss of a pony which had broke loose a night or two before, and of which no trace could be found. While I was in the woods the chief of police in Allentown, in company of a gentleman from Baltimore, came to the camp. The latter had previously sent on the following telegram:

“Are any of the Gypsies in camp in your vicinity? If so, would you see if they have a boy – blue eyes, light, curly hair, about five feet four? If he is there detain him. His name is Frank Brooks.

“Wm. D. Brooks.”

The Gypsies disclaimed all knowledge of the boy, but from their manner I was convinced that they knew more than they cared to tell. Mr. Brooks, who resides on Lombard street, Baltimore, says, that his son left home some weeks ago, and has not since been heard of.
From his habits, Mrs. Brooks supposed that he had gone with a band of Gypsies, as he had a predilection for their wandering mode of life. From information received the afflicted father believed that the young fellow was with the identical band of Gypsies who treated your correspondent so hospitably; but he was disappointed in the hope of finding him, and left very disconsolate. Two of the children who were with the Gypsies looked very unlike the persons who claimed to be their parents, and, in all probability, they have been stolen.

[ “Child Stealers, - The Zingari – A Visit to Their Camp in the Lehigh Valley.” Daily Critic (Washington, D.C.), Jun. 26, 1873, p. 3]


Paula Fass makes an effort in her book to promote the false idea that Gypsy kidnapping of children is merely a “myth.” The actual myth is this: the politically correct doctrine that gypsies gained a reputation as child kidnappers for any reason other than the fact that over a long period of time, in many geographical regions, gypsy bands kidnapped children were frequently recovered from the gypsies who had kidnapped them.

“Indeed, the theft of children by those assumed to be less than fully human [no evidence is offered that Gypsies were considered by anyone to be so”], even without the supposed torture or sacrifice of blood [referring to beliefs in Satanic sacrifice cults, but not referring to historically factual animist child sacrifice customs] remained an important residue in beliefs about gypsies. All over modern Europe (and to a lesser degree in the United States), the belief that gypsies stole children as they passed through towns and villages on their endless wandering was part of this process of ejection since gypsies were defined [by the Gypsies themselves, the author fails to mention] as utterly apart from and outside of the community.” [p. 13-14, Fass, Paula, Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America, 1997, Oxford University Press]

In reference to the 1874 Charley Ross case:

“Knowing only that Charley had been taken but not why, the police acted on customary assumptions and tried to find Charley and his abductors by making inquiries at such places  as ferry stops, taverns, livery stables. As word of mouth spread, the news about Charley began to generate an assortment of rumors. In one of the first of these, a child had been spotted in a gypsy wagon ‘crying bitterly’ who it was ‘suspected did not belong to them.’ In all, the police in Philadelphia and elsewhere reportedly searched 200 gypsy caravans within a year and one-half after Charley disappeared.” [p. 27, Fass, Paula, Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America, 1997, Oxford University Press]

“Among the thousands of letters the Patzes [Etan Patz, 7-years-old: kidnapped May 25, 1979, New York, N.Y.] received, one urged them to “look for gypsies (gitanos), a reminder that, more than one hundred years after the first widely publicized abduction [referring to Ross 1874. The author is incorrect. The first widely publicized abduction was the Pool case, 1819], some myths still persisted.” [p. 215, Fass, Paula, Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America, 1997, Oxford University Press]

The Lehigh Valley, also known as the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ metropolitan area and referred to locally as The Valley, is an official metropolitan region consisting of Lehigh, Northampton and Carbon counties in eastern Pennsylvania and Warren county on the western edge of New Jersey. [Wikipedia]

Following is a samall selection of cases of the sort we are taught to believe never occurred.

FULL TEXT: GIPSIES ABOUT. – A tribe of these wandering, straggling, homeless creatures have picked their tents in the neighborhood of Green Lawn, and it behooves citizens and the police to keep a sharp watch on them, for they have a peculiar habit of appropriating everything “laying around loose” to themselves. Esquire LILLY yesterday informed us that one of the females of the camp was detected in an attempt to steal a little girl of his about three years of age. The woman had induced the nurse of the child to follow her into the country, promising her presents, &c., but a member of the family discovered the little girl having the babe in charge a great distance from home, and under the guidance of the Gipsy woman, succeeded in baffling the child stealer. The predatory habits of these wandering vagabonds render them objects of suspicion and dread.

[“Gipsies About.” The Daily Ohio Statesman (Columbus, Oh.), Sep. 19, 1858, p. 3]

FULL TEXT: On the 28th of February last a little girl, whose parents reside at No. 61 James-street, was very mysteriously taken from them. Mr. MICHAEL GREENAN, the father of their child, made every effort in his power to ascertain the whereabouts of his daughter, but all to no purpose. The police were notified, the telegraph brought into requisition, and the office for the temporary detention of lost children was visited day after day by the anxious relatives, but no clue could be obtained. The last seen [sic] of the child was on the sidewalk in front of the parents’ residence, on the day above named. Recently Detective WILSON and officer GOLDEN, of the Sixth Precinct, undertook to ferret out the mystery, and after much labor and time spent in the search, they have at last succeeded in restoring the lost child to its parents. The found the girl in the company of gipsies, near Sing Sing, on the Hudson River. A young woman, named ANN McCLUSKEY, was arrested and brought to this City with the child. ANN states that she took the little girl as she was playing on the sidewalk in from of its parents’ house. The accused is 19 years of age, and appears quite intelligent for a gipsy. Justice CONNOLLY, before whom she was taken yesterday, committed her to await a further examination. The child is about 2 years of age, and through naturally bright and interesting, it has become rather wayward and forbidding in appearance during its ten months sojourn among the gipsies.

[Indexed as: (Greenan case), “Recovery of a Child Stolen By Gypsies,” The New York Times (N.Y.), Jan. 5, 1862]

EVANSVILLE, IND., July 10.—Mr. Carson, of Columbus, Ohio, arrived here yesterday morning from Memphis. He had with him his son and daughter, aged nine and thirteen respectively. In February, 1884, the two children were sent to a butcher’s some distance from their home and never returned. A gang of gypsies that left Columbus that morning were suspected of the kidnapping, and the father and a detective started in pursuit. Time and again they were hot on the trail, only to lose it again. July 1st, while at Memphis, the father learned that the gang had divided, one party being encamped at Lagrange, Tenn., and the other at Covinston, Ky. He immediately started to Covington, and on July 2d found his boy, and after another day's journey the Lagrange camp was reached, and the little girl recovered. The gypsies had darkened her skin and dyed her hair, letting it fall loose. A scar had also been branded on her neck. In fact, everything possible had been done to destroy her identity. The father left last evening with his children for home.

[“Stolen Children Recovered. “ The Decatur Daily Republican (Il.), Jul. 10, 1885, p. 2]

FULL TEXT: Decatur, Ill., Aug. 12. – Excitement was caused here this afternoon by the discovery that Frank Wise, stepson of S. M. Davis, had been kidnapped by a band of gypsies. Several hours after the disappearance the child was found at the gypsy camp strung up to the branch of a tree by the thumbs and in great torture. The gypsies fled on the appearance of the father and officers and the boy was cut down, with both thumbs badly lacerated. The lad was punished was punished because he refused to remain with the gang. A force of constables and a posse of citizens have been in the timber for hours in search of the gypsies, who fled on horseback, leaving their camp outfit behind. If caught the band will summarily dealt with. Davis threatens to shoot the gypsies on sight.

[“Kidnaped By Gypsies. – A Lad Stolen and Tortured by a Roving Band Near Decatur.” The Chicago Tribune (Il.), Aug. 13, 1887, p. 5]

FULL TEXT: Chattanooga, Tenn., Feb. 17.—Wednesday morning at 11 o’clock a band of gypsies, camped at Lookout Mountain, were riding along Boyce street, this city, when one of them threw a lasso and caught James Williams, an eleven-year-old boy, around the neck. He was hauled into the wagon, and notwithstanding his cries he was compelled to surrender. The capture was made in the resident portion of the city. The boy was taken to the mountain, when he again began crying and wanted to return home. He was tied with ropes and brutally beaten, so that his body is covered with stripes from head to foot. After the terrible beating had been administered he was taken out and tied to a tree and left there for a few hours, until the gipsies could get ready to move on.

The little fellow watched his chance, and at 3 o’clock managed to untied the rope, and, while the gypsies had their backs turned, made his escape and ran all the wav to the city, arriving at his home a little before 5 o’clock. The circumstances were reported at police headquarters, and Deputy Sheriff Spencer, arrived with a warrant and summoning a posse of men, started in pursuit of the gypsies, who are hiding in the mountains. The injured boy is badly hurt, and is in a serious condition.

[“Kidnaped By Gypsies. - A Chattanooga Lad Carried to Lookout and Brutally Treated.” Newark Daily Advocate (Oh.), Feb. 17, 1888, p. 1]

FULL TEXT: Bartlett, Neb., Jan 12 -- Charles Reynolds has recovered his only child whom he had given up for lost John Mayfield a wealthy man the proprietor of the extensive Mayfield ranch near Hyannis is as happy as the overjoyed parents to have been able to bring this about.

Wilhelmina Reynolds who is restored to her parents is three years old. Early last September she disappeared from her home Mrs. Reynolds became distracted and could only remember that she had seen the little one playing in  front of the house as late as 4 o’clock in the afternoon. Kidnapping was the generally accepted theory as Mr. Reynolds is a merchant of means and as the day passed the parents hoped for the demand for ransom Months went by and no trace of the missing girl was discovered.

John Mayfield brought a load of cattle to Omaha and while dining with a member of the South Omaha Exchange told the story of the adoption into his home of a little girl who called herself Willie. At the mention of the name a Mrs. Jameson who was a guest listened with the closest attention.

~ Traded a Dog for Her. ~

Mr. Mayfield’s story was that in September while roaming over his ranch with two of his hunting dogs he had come upon some gypsies camped upon his property. They had camping wagons and Mr. Mayfield noticed a black haired little girl playing around who it was evident did not belong to the dusky band. The rancher was pleased with the little girls appearance and upon asking her name the tot lisped Willie in such a pathetic manner that the man’s heart was touched.

A longing came over him to take the little one into his childless home and Mr. Mayfield asked what they wanted for the girl. The band had admired Mr. May fields beautiful hunting dogs and after the leaders had talked the matter over among themselves a trade was made, the rancher parting with one of his dogs and taking the child home with him leaving the gypsies entirely satisfied that they had the best of the bargain. The little one was immediately adopted by the Mayfields as their own child.

~ Was the Long-Lost Baby. ~

When the rancher had finished his story Mrs. Jameson explained that her sister Mrs. Reynolds of Bartlett had lost her baby daughter in the fall and from Mr. Mayfleld’s description of the child and the fact that the little one called herself Willie, it was at once decided that the rancher  adopted daughter was the lost Wilhelmina Reynolds.

Mrs. Mayfield was immediately sent for to meet Mr. Mayfield with the little girl.

[“Lucky Trade Of A Dog For A Child Parents And Baby - Little Three-Tear-Old Wilhelmina Reynolds Disappeared Last September Accidentally Found In Gypsy Camp.” The Washington Times, Jan. 13, 1902, p. 2]

FULL TEXT: Marion, Ind., Aug. 2. – Several members of a band of gypsies are imprisoned in the county jail here, charged with child stealing. The 3-year-old daughter of Henry Herman, a glaa manufacturer, was stolen yesterday from the home of her grandparents, where her parents had left her while they were enjoying an outing. Gypsies driving past the house kidnapped the child and drove south with her. In South Marion they stopped at the saloon, where the little girl was recognized by Mr. Wilson, a friend of her parents. Mr. Wilson, a friend of her parents. Mr. Wilson rescued the child from her captors and took her to his own home. Later the gypsies were pursued and arrested.

[“Gypsies Held For Kidnapping – The Child of a Wealthy Marion, Ind., Glass Manufacturer Stolen.” The Kansas City Star (Mo.), Aug. 2, 1902, p. 3]

FULL TEXT: St. Petersburg,  Jan 15 – That a father who had mourned for seven years a kidnapped child should find her through picking up, in a city where he was visiting, a pocketbook belonging to the man whose hands his daughter had passed, would be descried as impossible were it used as a plot in a piece of fiction.

Yet in that very incident lies the restoration to her father and mother of little Helen Koveleff, daughter of a Russian army officer. All Russia is excited over the case.

Seven years ago Col. Koveleff, a wealthy landowner was living with his wife and 4-year-old daughter Helen on his estate at Kamentz, in the province of Pskoff. One day one of his estate at Kamentz, in the province at Pskoff. One day one of the colonel’s servants became involved in a violent quarrel with his wife, a domestic in the colonel’s household, and terminated a dispute by throwing a dagger at her. The wife dodged the weapon, which missed her, but struck Helen, who happened to be running past. The dagger wounded the child’s ear, inflicting a permanent scar.

A few months later the little girl disappeared, and it was believed that she had been kidnapped by a band of gypsies who had passed through Kamenetz. All the efforts of the parents to recover the child were unsuccessful.

In 1897 a shopkeeper in Odessa, named Breitmann, who kept a small fruit store, saw a little girl crying bitterly in front of his house. He took her to his wife and between them they ascertained, after much questioning, that the little girl had been sent out to beg and had been sent out to beg and had lost her way. The child was unable to give them much information about herself but they understood that she had formerly lived in a beautiful home, and that latterly she had been wandering up and down the country with a troop of gypsies, whom she had helped to support by begging.

As Breitmann and its wife had no children of their own, they took the little girl and brought her up as though she had been their daughter. She was happy in the humble home of the Odesso fruit dealer.

A week or two ago Col. Koveloff, with his wife, happened to be visiting Odessa and picked up a pocketbook in the street. He informed the police of his discovery and kept the pocketbook. In the course of the day, Breitmann, the fruit dealer, modified the police that he had lost a pocketbook and the police gave him the address of Col. Koveloff. As the pocketbook contained no money and was of no particular value, Breitmann did not go himself to fetch it, but sent his adopted daughter.

Madame Koveleff took a strange fancy to the little girl and asked her all sorts of questions about herself and her relatives. The girl related that she did not know her own father and mother, and that she was being brought up by adopted parents. She had been kidnapped and taken away from home, she said, by a wicked woman who had been given her the name of Mary. Madame Koveleff was greatly agitated by the little girl’s story. She sprang up, ran toward her and lifter the hair which covered the left ear. After the glance the woman shrieked and fainted, for she had seen on the ear the scar which told her that she had found her lost daughter. Apart from this scar, the girl wore a little locket round her neck in which the date of her birth was engraved. Helen Koveloff was taken home in triumph, and happiness now reigns in a reunited family.

Col. Koveloff gave Brietmann $5000, besides a house on his estate and a farm of several hundred acres, which he can occupy free of rent during his lifetime.

[“Found a Pocketbook and His Lost Daughter – Little Girl Who Was Kidnaped by Gypsies Restored to Her Parents by What Seemed a Miracle – Foster Parent Given Rich Reward,” The Evening Telegram (Fort Worth, Tx.), Jan. 16, 1905, p. 5] 

PHOTO CAPTION: John and Mrs. Adam, and Rosie Adam, parents and kidnapped daughter, in year-long chase, which ended yesterday. Photograph made before John Croix’s camp at Salem, where girl was found yesterday.


~ Kidnapped From Chicago. ~

Early in October a year ago little Rosie was walking on Michigan avenue, Chicago, where her father conducted a prosperous store. She was finely dressed, and in appearance is a handsome brunette. She was 13 years old and exceedingly intelligent. A woman approached and asked her to carry a parcel to the railroad station, offering her half a dollar for the task. She did it, and whom arriving at the Union station she was pushed into a car and informer in a quiet voice that if she made any outcry she would be murdered before she could make her escape.

Night came and the peaceful home of the quiet Russian family, Mrs. Adam there was weeping and heart-broken. The husband and father, when he returned from the store at supper time was told that his little girl had not been since early in the afternoon. He checked his wife with encouraging words, but with a sinking heart, fearing something he could not tell, but could only fret, he returned to his store. He was restless, and could not attend to business, so he finally closed the doors a number of hours before the usual time and hastened home to learn whether or not ant tidings had been received from the absent girl.

~  Finds Wife in Tears. ~

He found his wife weeping, she also telling the fear that was burning in his own breast. The long hours passed and Rosie did not appear. She at that time was on a train bound for New York, and speeding at express speed eastward, many hundreds of miles away.

They know not that, however, and it was not until morning that the heartbroken father and mother had the courage to tell their neighbors instantly there was a hue and cry and after much searching over the big city it was learned that Rosie had  carried bundle to the Union Station and that she accompanied by a strange woman. This was learned from another girl who had passed the path on Halstead street.

~ Revelation From Heaven. ~

In a moment Mr. Adam declared yesterday, it was as if he had received a revelation from heaven. Something seemed to tell the bereaved parent that his little girl, whose kiss he had missed the night before for the first time in many years would be found among the gipsies. He told his wife. She agreed, and selling the stake in Chicago a proposition that required some weeks, the hunt began.

A gipsy band was traced from Chicago to Jackson, Mich. Rose was not there, but the trip was not fruitless for Mr. Adam made the acquaintance of a Russian gipsy who since that time has been of the greatest assistance to him in his search. He was told that another gipsy band was encamped on the outskirts of Detroit.

Thither started  Mr. Adams with his faithful wife who never faltered in her devotion to her child, and who even when misfortune assailed them never lost faith that eventually they would recover their little darling.

~  Quest Grows Harder. ~

From Detroit the way became harder still for there they learned that numerous gipsy bands had been about the city of La Croix in the weeks since their little Rosie had been torn from her home. To pick out one and say that that was the one in which Rosie would be found would be useless so, hand in hand the grieving father and mother walked to the railroad station determined to visit every camp no matter where the journey took them.

The money secured from the Chicago store was being eaten up woefully fast in those days of travel and economies soon became necessary as they had not the slightest idea of the length of time their search would continue. For that reason the cold ground was sought for a couch until the weather became such that they were obliged to seek shelter in the night.

~ Gipsies Sell Girl. ~

During these days it was learned that Rosie was with the gipsies and that she had been sold from one tribe into another that was headed for the East. It was the first tangible clue that they had received of the whereabouts of their child and satisfied now that they were on the right track xxx began, in a matter of economy to practice the life of gipsies themselves insensibly at first with no thought that they ever themselves would become the members of a gipsy camp they made preparations for the life which they were compelled to lead before their search had ended.

To Buffalo they trailed the camp in which their child was being harbored, there they learned that their trip had been useless and that the tribe was on its way to Syracuse. At DeWitt just east of that city they found the band. Quietly searching but without making known their errand they discovered that only two days before their little Rosie had been sold into the tribe of Big Chieftan John Croix, one of the dreaded men in Romany life and on whose fame spread to Hungary, Canada and even into Egypt.

~ Card Reader and Shark. ~

They also learned that Rosie had been initiated into the mystical card reading and other methods of defrauding gullible persons. They also discovered that so proficient had she become at the art that she was counted a treasured possession of the gipsy camps and that she was likely to be sold to other camps when the price was placed highly enough. The last time she was sold and changed hands as a result although the only remuneration that Rosie herself received from the work she was doing was a percentage of the money received. The remainder went into the tribal fund and to one whom they all called the Great Mother to whom Rosie was assigned in New York immediately after she was kidnapped and who taught the art of card and palm reading.

~ Lose Track of Child. ~

With the John Croix tribe, Rosie finally came to Worchester but at that time her devoted father and mother lost track of her for several days. They were then at DeWitt, that being early last summer. Slowly they journeyed making careful inquiry, and at Albany they were again put on a false scent that delayed them a number of weeks. A gipsy camp at Newton at the time served again to put them on the wrong scent but they finally heard of the Croix camp at Worchester and back to that city they journeyed.

There they learned that Croix and his band had gone further east. Word was received of a camp at Somerville. They came to Boston and being out of funds they walked to the Somerville camp. It was the tribe of John Stanley and there with no money to go further Mr. Adams proposed to the big chief that he and his wife be taken into the tribe.

[“Parents Clasp Kidnapped Child In Arms After Twenty Years Search For Gipsy Captors,” The Boston Journal (Ma.), Nov. 8, 1906]

FULL TEXT: Chicago, Feb. 26. – After a search of nearly a year, in which almost every gypsy camp in the South and Northwest has been visited. Cecilia Demetro, twelve years old, daughter of a wealthy Greek in Little Rock, Ark., who had been kidnapped March 1, 1906, was found yesterday in a camp near Thornton, Ill. She was given shelter at a police station last night.

Trace of the girl was obtained by Leo Demetro, her father, who had, searched for her eight months in vain. Then he met a gypsy in Salt Lake City who gave him a clew. Accompanied by four deputy sheriffs, Demetro went to Thornton yesterday. Just beyond the outskirts of a camp of more than 100 tents. There Cecilia was held prisoner. When the Greek coppersmith and his companions arrived, the girl was playing on the prairie with several other youngsters.

Before he could reach his daughter, he was thrust aside by John Joe, king of the camp, who is said to have kidnapped the child. Joe burst from a tent and seized Cecilia as she was about to spring into her father’s arms. In an instant hundreds of gypsies were swarming out of their homes. Demetro seized Gypsy Joe by the throat.

Scores of Joe’s followers threatened to interfere, but the sheriffs drew their revolvers and seized the little girl. An instant later Demetro regained his feet, and, taking his daughter, stood with the officers. Awed by the display of weapons, the gypsies retreated, and the rescuing party, with the child, hurried to Thornton, where they boarded a train for Chicago.
[“Finds Child In Gypsy Camp – Father Is Rewarded After Year’s Search for Kidnappers. – Twelve-year-old girl Stolen from Little Rock, Ark., Is Rescued by Armed Men.” Washington Post (D.C.), Feb. 27, 1907, p. 11]

FULL TEXT: OAKLAND. Feb. 15—Two year old Henry Dietz, con of Dr. Henry  L. Dietz and winner of a prize as the handsomest child of his age west of the Rocky mountains, had a narrow escape from being kidnaped by a gypsy woman in front of his home at 1630 Eighth street, according to a report made to the police this morning.

The little chap was playing on the sidewalk with two small companions when the gypsy, who had been lingering in the vicinity for some time, picked from up in her arms and started down the street.

She had proceeded only a few steps when Mrs. Steams, a neighbor of the Dietz family, living at 1626 Eighth street, who was watching the woman, raised her window and called to her to stop. Terrified at her discovery the woman dropped the child and hastened away down the street. Before any attempt was made to follow her she had disappeared.


Little Henry Dietz is a child of exceptional beauty, with heavy golden hair and big blue eyes. He was playing with a 7 year old boy who lives nearby and had charge of a baby. The gypsy woman passed the group of children, glancing intently at the handsome boy as she went by. Half way up the block she stopped and looked back enviously. Then, peering cautiously .about to make sure she was not observed, she started back in the direction of the children and told the older boy to take the baby into the house. He obeyed her, and she then attempted to kidnap his companion.


There is a large encampment of gypsies at the corner or Sixteenth and Peralta streets, where they have been living for several months. The band is row preparing to migrate to St. Louis, where a king of all the tribes will be elected, and the police believe that the kidnaper had planned to hold the child for a ransom in the hope of securing money enough to defray the traveling expenses of the tribe across, the continent.

Henry Dietz was awarded a prize by a New York fashion publication last year in a children's beauty contest. Dr. Dietz reported the attempted kidnapping of his son to the police and an investigation is being made.

[“Handsome Child's Abductor Balked - Neighbor Compels Gypsy to Drop 2 Year Old Son of Oakland Physician - Boy Awarded Prize for Beauty in Contest Attracts Attention of Wanderer.” The Call (San Francisco, Ca.), Feb. 19, 1909, p. 8]

FULL TEXT: Potsdam, Aug. 23-—Kidnaped when but 8 years of age, searched- for in vain ail over northern New York mourned as dead by his parents, carried into foreign countries by a band of gypsies, beaten and misused, delivered from them in a daring escape about two weeks ago, shielded in Canadian monastery, and finally restored to his family—these are some of the dramatic chapters in the life of Frederick Brosseau, a son of Mr. and Mrs. John Brosseau of this village, who was kidnaped on October 14th, 1890, and who was identified beyond doubt by his father and mother in Montreal last week.

On the fall afternoon seventeen years aero the boy went to meet his father who was employed in the mills of the A. Sherman Lumber company at Sisponville. It was but a short distance from the home of the family to the rapids below. Suspicion was also directed toward two rough appearing strangers who were seen about the mill during the day, but who disappeared about the time the boy was missed.

Two weeks ago last Monday a young man applied for aid to a Catholic father on a boat on the river Ottawa. He had escaped from gypsies, he said, and had a tale to tell of cruelty and inhuman treatment well nigh past belief. He could recall that he came from Northern New York and that his name was Frederick. He knew that he had been kidnaped, for an old woman of the tribe, mortally ill, had called him to her and told him that he was not one of them. She lapsed into unconsciousness before he had an opportunity to learn more. He was anxious to find his parents, but was penniless! and without friends. Would the father help him? The father would.

~ Taken to Monastery. ~

The young man was taken to the Trappist monastery at Oka, near Lachine. The Montreal police were notified and publicity given the affair in the Montreal newspapers, who also printed the young man’s picture. The affair aroused considerable comment in the Canadian city. Mrs. Katherine Perry, a sister of Mrs. Brosseau is living in Montreal, and her attention was called to the boy whose escape was attracting so much notice. Knowing well the story of her nephew’s disappearance, she thought she saw a family resemblance in the picture, and communicated with  the family here. Father Marron of St. Mary’s parish also received clippings from the Montreal papers, together with a description of the young man., and at his solicitation Mr. and Mrs. Brosseau left last week for the monestary.

The parents were easily able to pick their son out of a crowd in the court yard, and by a birth mark on his forehead the identification was almost complete. The resemblance of Frederick to his brother Frank strengthened the proof. And above all the filial instinct which had never died through all the years seemed to draw the mother and son irresistibly together.

~ Visited Four Countries. ~

The story of Brousseau’s wanderings since he was stolen seventeen years ago is a remarkable one. In this  time he has been taken through four foreign countries, Spain, France, Italy and Bohemia, remaining long enough in each to learn to speak the language fluently. His first journey abroad was thirteen years ago. Since that time the band has spent each winter in foreign lands.

The caravan in which the lad found himself engaged extensively in kidnapping operations, the stolen boys being kept as laborers in the camp, the girls being invariably being sold for cash.  Young Brosseau, stealing up behind the head man of the tribe one night, saw $500 in cash paid for a handsome young girl. There were, up to a short time ago, three stolen children in the camp with Brosseau. He aided a young boy to escape several weeks ago. The other child, a girl, is still with them. The Canadian police are hot on their trail, however, and hope to overhaul the band soon.

~ Story of Cruelty. ~

Brousseau’s story of the torture in which he and the other captives were subjected is horrible in the extreme. Beaten with poisoned whips for the slightest offence, their bodies rubbed with poisonous oil to make the flesh swell, pounded with clubs till their skin was a mass of bruises, it is remarkable that they survived. The young man at Oka shows plainly the effects of his inhuman treatment.

At the present time Brosseau is detained as a witness by the Montreal police. It will probably be from three to four weeks before he can return here. As the trial of the kidnapers will last that long if they are caught. Should they evade the vigilance of the police he may be home sooner.

[“Potsdam Boy's Life Since He Was Stolen by Gypsies in 1896 Reads Like a Fairy Tale.” Syracuse Herald (N.Y.), Aug. 24, 1913, p. 15]

FULL TEXT: Detroit, Mich., Feb. 3. – Luba Jace, the fourteen-year-old daughter of Paul Jace of New York City, was rescued from a band of gypsies here to-night after a battle in which a squad of police were forced to use their revolvers in order to subdue the band.

The girl was kidnapped from her parents in Youngstown, Ohio, nine months ago. A brother and sister have trailed her all over the United States since then. Last Friday they located the band in Detroit and to-day went to the gypsy colony and demanded the child. The gypsies refused to give her up, and a fight started in which the sister’s hair was almost all pulled out, and her clothing torn from her.

At this point the police arrived and the entire band attacked them. After using their clubs, the police drew their revolvers and cowed the gypsies with a few shots.

The rescued girl and her brother and sister were taken to Central Station, where they asked to be protected until the next train left for New York. The girl stated that she had been forced to wed a gypsy boy of her own age.

[“Rescued From Gypsies. – Girl Traced by Brother and Sister and Recovered After Fierce Fight." The New York Times (N.Y.), Feb. 4, 1914, p. 4]

PHOTO CAPTION: “Andy Smith,” wanderer with a gypsy troupe since he was kidnaped at the age of 8, is back home in Steubenville, O., after 20 years, because Tony Mahfood had a vision that the young man was his son, after seeing him and noting a striking resemblance to his lost boy, James. Blood tests gave support to the kindred belief and a scar added to the identification. So “Smith” now is James Mahfood, shown here, center, with the parent who never gave up hope for his return [“Boy Stolen by Gypsies 20 Years Ago is Returned to His Parents,” nationally syndicated (NEA), The Coshocton Tribune (Oh.), Mar. 21, 1935, p. 2]