Fortune's rocks_ a novel - Anita Shreve [159]
“Well, yes, the doctor had been in touch with the orphanage on several matters prior to the fifteenth of April of that year, since he was often in a position of needing to place out infants of mothers who had perished giving birth or of young girls who could not care for the infants.”
“I see. And had he been in touch with you regarding the matter of the issue of Olympia Biddeford?”
“Yes, sir, he had. Though he did not tell us the mother’s name. Only that he would be bringing to us sometime in April an infant who would be without mother or father, and would we make certain that there would be a place for the child. And, of course, there always would be, since Dr. Haskell had treated so many of our children and had not ever charged for his services.”
“And did Dr. Haskell bring that infant to you on the morning of fifteen April 1900?”
“Actually, sir, it was in the afternoon of April fifteenth. He came to my office with the infant.”
“And what happened?”
“He seemed most distraught by the plight of the child and deeply concerned that it be well cared for. Although he did not tell me of the circumstances of the infant’s birth, and I did not feel in a position to ask, I did think that perhaps the matter concerned Dr. Haskell personally, since he was in such a distraught state and also because he gave the child his name. Though not unheard-of, this was unusual. And also he gave the orphanage a considerable sum of money for the child’s care. He was insistent that we place the child out as soon as possible, and he charged us with finding the infant a household with two parents.”
“And then what happened?”
“He kissed the boy on the forehead and gave the child to me.”
“And did you place the boy out as you had been charged?”
“Yes, sir. We placed the boy with Mr. and Mrs. Bolduc.”
• • •
Counsel for the respondents wishes to put questions to Mother Marguerite Pelletier:
“Mother Marguerite, did you have occasion last August to meet the relator in this case?”
“Yes, Mr. Sears, I did.”
“Can you describe for the court that meeting?”
“She came to my door wanting to inquire about a certain child. I believe I quickly ascertained that the child in question was hers. She gave me some facts about her situation.”
“And what fact led you to discover that her child was the infant child Dr. Haskell had left in your charge on fifteen April 1900?”
“She told me the name of the father.”
“I see. And then what happened?”
“I left her in my office and went to have a discussion about this matter with Bishop Louis Giguere, who is also one of the directors of the orphanage.”
“And what did you and Bishop Giguere determine?”
“We determined that we would tell the young woman that her child had been in our care but had been placed out to a loving couple. We also decided to tell the young woman the first name of the boy, but not his surname.”
“And why was that?”
“We wanted to protect the privacy of the child as well as that of the foster parents.”
“And how did Olympia Biddeford react to this news?”
“She was quite upset.”
“Was there anything unusual in your discussion with Olympia Biddeford that day?”
“Yes, there was.”
“Will you tell the court what that was?”
“Well, Mr. Sears, unfortunately I see many young girls in similar situations. They think they can just abandon their babies and get on with their lives, and then from remorse or guilt or whatever feelings are motivating them, they show up on our doorstep wanting the child back. And I thought at first Olympia Biddeford was like the other young women I have seen. Except that she was not.”
“And how was that?”
“She was unrepentant. I asked her if she was ready to seek forgiveness for her sins, and she let me know in no uncertain terms that she did not think her actions at all sinful and that she would not ask for forgiveness for something she did not consider wrong.”
“Do you recall the specific language of that exchange?”
“I told her that no one just happens to conceive a child, that there is will involved and intent, and that she had