In re Can-ah-couqua
United States District Court for the District of Alaska
29 Fed. 687 (1887)

- Written by Katrina Sumner, JD
Facts
In May 1883, an Indian mother, Can-ah-couqua (plaintiff), voluntarily surrendered custody of her five-year-old son, Can-ca-dach, to a Presbyterian mission school in Alaska. Can-ah-couqua gave the school custody of her child for a period of five years so that he might receive an education. Can-ah-couqua went along with the agreement for three years. During this time, the school provided Can-ca-dach with food, clothing, and shelter. Can-ah-couqua did not have to pay for anything. Can-ah-couqua recognized her son’s progress and expressed satisfaction with her son’s treatment. However, after three years, when Can-ca-dach was eight years old, Can-ah-couqua wanted her son returned to her custody. The superintendent of the mission school, William A. Kelly (defendant), refused to return Can-ca-dach to his mother’s custody. Can-ah-couqua petitioned for habeas corpus, alleging that her son was unlawfully restrained against her wishes by Superintendent Kelly and Chaplain A. E. Austin (defendant). Kelly and Austin acknowledged they had custody of Can-ca-dach pursuant to the terms of their agreement with Can-ah-couqua to keep the child for five years, and they denied that Can-ca-dach’s detention was unlawful.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dawson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.