"OPINION.

'I have given to this case my most careful attention; and it is
one of great difficulty. Having regard to the questions put to
me, I think--

"1. Section 56 of the Act of 24 and 25 Vict., c. 100, appears at
first sight to be directed against the stealing and abduction of
children for marriage, or other improper purposes. It provides
that 'Whosoever shall UNLAWFULLY, either by force or fraud, lead
or take away, or decoy, or entice away, or detain any child, &c.,
with intent to deprive ANY parent, &c., of the possession of such
child'--shall be guilty of felony. It is perfectly clear, that
in the case before me, the infant was not, 'by force or fraud,
led or taken away, or decoyed, or enticed away.' The statute,
however, uses the word 'detain;' and this, it appears to me, has
much the same force and intention as the previous words. It is
to be noted, however, that it is separated from them by the
disjunctive 'or;' and, therefore, it might be argued with some
plausibility that any act of forceful or fraudulent detention,
after notice, by persons who have originally acquired a child's
custody in a lawful way, came within the section. The point is
new, and of great importance; and if the Protestant Detectoral
Association feel disposed to try it, they would do so under
favorable circumstances in the present case. Should they decide
to do so, a written demand should be served upon the authorities
of the convent, by the mother, or some one acting on her behalf,
to give up the infant.