Waite v. Washington

44 Mich. 388
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided October 19, 1880·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Marston, C. J.

The primary object contemplated by the statute in proceedings under the Bastardy Act is the protection of the public against all possible danger of being obliged to support the child. With this object in view the father is required to contribute to its support, and to. insure compliance, security is required and imprisonment to compel the giving thereof. Such proceedings being for the benefit and protection of the public, the expense of the imprisonment must fall upon the people and not upon the mother of the child. This is the only correct conclusion that can be arrived at under the legislation and late decisions in this State.

It follows that the writ must issue.

The other Justices concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Waite v. Washington, 44 Mich. 388 (Mich. 1880).

44 Mich. 388 (Waite v. Washington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Witt v. Seabrook
533 N.W.2d 22 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1995)
Pridemore v. Williams
282 N.W.2d 363 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1979)
Artibee v. Cheboygan Circuit Judge
243 N.W.2d 248 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1976)
People v. Harty
13 N.W. 829 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1882)
In re Cannon
11 N.W. 280 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1882)