 |
| The Hatbox Baby, then . . . |
The mystery of the Hatbox Baby has intrigued Valley residents for decades. That such a tiny personage could engender such widespread and enduring interest, perplex so many -- and even work to damage innocent lives -- can seem almost inexplicable.
Yet: One baby. In one hatbox. Managed to do just that.
Christmas Eve of 1931, a young couple, not long married, was driving home though the desert. They had taken their cousins up north to see snow, and were on their way back home, when their car broke down about seven miles west of the mining town of Superior, a town not far from the Superstition Mountains, home of another Arizona legend.
 |
| The Hatbox she was found in. |
She called for Ed.
Ed came over and looked more closely. Inside the hatbox, lay a 10-month-old baby.
 |
| . . . and "The Hatbox Baby Now." 83 yr old Sharon Elliot in 2013 |
Maier temporarily placed the baby in a maternity home run by a woman known as Ma Dana. A few days later, she was adopted by a couple with no children.
The story made national news in 1931. Valley newspapers usually ran Christmas stories about her discovery each year. For decades afterward, Valley residents and newspapers asked, "What ever happened to the Hatbox Baby?"
The answer: she had a full life and even raised three kids of her own.
For most of her life, Sharon Elliot didn't know she was the famous "Hatbox Baby." In fact, she didn't even know she was adopted. She finally learned the truth in her mid-fifties. Yet, she still doesn't really know who her mother was, or how she came to be abandoned, in a pasteboard hatbox, in the middle of the open desert on Christmas Eve.
But what of the couple who found her?
Rumors flew!
The couple hadn't been married long, and wagging tongues claimed it had been a "shotgun wedding," the baby "discovered" in the desert so they wouldn't have to own up to their premarital misdeeds.
In the end, the couple fled the Valley, moving elsewhere, seeking land where no one had heard of the baby they found in the desert. It became a point of contention between the two of them, and they constantly refused to answer interview questions from reporters who hunted them down years later.
Thus, while we ponder who could have left a baby in such an inhospitable place -- in only a hatbox -- we are also faced by what may well be the greater mystery of the Hatbox Baby: Why did folks allow wagging tongues to do so much harm to a young couple who did nothing but save a baby from near-certain death? In one sense, the Stewart's lives might have been much simpler if they had simply convinced themselves that they had heard nothing crying out there in the lonely desert on that Christmas Eve. But, then again, they would have had to live with the guilt.
This quandary filed not in the Twilight Zone, but in the SleuthSayers blog, under "A" for Arizona oddities.
--Dixon
Interesting story. However, I'm a little suspicious of the story by the couple who found her. It's a big desert and seems highly unlikely they would break down where the baby was abandoned. Stranger things have happened, of course. But it's food for thought.
ReplyDeleteAngels are everywhere and it seems to me this hat box baby on Christmas Eve had her own angels with her
DeleteSeemed like a possibility that that couple had the baby and pretended they had found it. Much like Loretta Young "adopted" her own baby..
DeleteSeemed like a possibility that that couple had the baby and pretended they had found it. Much like Loretta Young "adopted" her own baby..
DeleteA sad and marvelous story. I always thought the old saying, no good deed goes unpunished, was too cynical but maybe not in the Arizona desert!
ReplyDeleteSince the baby was 10 months old, it's hard to believe that the newly married couple did all of this to hide their "premarital misdeeds". (Surely someone would have noticed before then if the bride had been pregnant or even looked like she was pregnant...) I think it was plain meanness and love of nasty, trash-talking gossip. I feel sorry for the poor couple, and thankful that the baby had a happy life.
ReplyDeleteWhat an interesting and poignant story, Dixon. I like how you tell the story. I’m glad Sharon Elliot was able to live a normal life after coming so close to the edge.
ReplyDeleteFunny… first thing I thought of when you mentioned the car breaking down was vapor lock, something you never encounter now that better fuel pumps and fuel-injection are standard. Would vapor lock have been more of a problem at that heat and altitude?
I agree with Eve. It's rare that another woman could get away with having secretly a baby, let alone a 10 month old one. I'm glad it turned out well!
ReplyDeleteLeigh, I used to live on the desert many years ago, and don't recall ever hearing about vapor lock being an issue. It was usually radiator problems from overheating of the engine. That was usually the problem when you found someone broken down by the side of the road. The elevation in most of those areas is about 1100 to 1400 feet, which I don't know if it's relevant or not. Anyway, maybe once the engine kind of boiled over then vapor lock kicked in. But that radiator is what tended to go first, if my memory serves.
ReplyDeleteAnon, that makes a lot of sense. The reduced atmospheric pressure would make the radiator more likely to boil. Thanks for the feedback!
ReplyDeleteThe baby, according to unsolved mysteries and the original court files when released to sharon when she requested them, was only 7 days old when taken to the police, not 10 months.
ReplyDeleteYes, the baby was 7 days old NOT 10 months. It's plausible that it was a teenage girl whether the stewarts knew the child or not is up for debate. However, I do find it odd that they would be SO upset of being "falsely accused" that they would decline all interviews. Sounds like the actions of a guilty person not willing to face the truth/ or be linked back to the birth parents. Just my opinion.
ReplyDeleteEd Stewart was my cousin and the two teens were my aunt and uncle. The Stewarts never left, they lived in Mesa, Arizona. I remember visiting them as a child. The 'baby' looks nothing like my mother's family as they were dark skinned. Also, they went thru all of their school and employment records and none of them were ever un-accounted for for the time it takes to have a baby.
ReplyDeleteThe Stewarts were genetically excluded from being the parents of the baby. There is a suspected link between the Stewarts, Sharon's adopted mother, and Sharon's birth parents. John D'Anna investigated this story for 30 years and with assistance he solved the mystery. Her parents are a German couple who had another child 2 years after they abandoned this one. I forget their names, I think the mother's name was Freda.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like that couple might have had that baby and pretended that they had found. Much likely ready young "adopted" her own baby.
ReplyDeleteThe Stewarts were my mother's cousins, the other 2 in the car were her brother and sister. They had nothing to do with any of it other than find the baby.
ReplyDeleteI solved the Hatbox Baby mystery using DNA, read the reporter's story here
ReplyDeletehttps://tinyurl.com/yasp4btm