Show URAL MARRIAGE E EIS IS DECLARED TO T BE MARRIAGE dGE IN FACT Supreme Says Action of f Leah Perks In Contracting Second Polygamous Marriage Deprives Her of Condi Conditional Condition tion l Legacy Left by Her First Husband jn in an opinion handed down by the reme court yesterday the contention of ot a woman that a polygamous mar marriage Is not a marriage In tact fact is not upheld The case arose out of a contest over the proper construction of ot the term marry again in the will of ot William Poppleton who died In Cache county count countIn in 1883 leaving three wives named In Inthe Inthe the will as Annie Poppleton Leah Perks and Mary Ann Jeffs Jeres I I The will provided among other things that Leah Perks should have a certain amount of land during her lifetime for tor her support and the support of ot her 1101 children by the deceased But If she should marry again the will provided that the children should divide the es estate estate tate left her with the exception of a tract upon which the home Is located which she might retain until her death when It would also revert to the children Second Rural F ral Marriage The was not admitted to probate until 1888 and a decree of at distribution was not made mado until 1907 At that time Leah Pe s came Into court and de demanded demanded all the land given her by the will setting up the tact fact that she had hadnot hadnot not married again as the basis of her claim calm The Tho evidence showed that In 1889 she hud had entered Into another plural marriage with one Crabtree but her herC contention C was that this was not a mar mare marge ge e within the scope of the word as asIn M In the will The lower court did not have this opinion however and de denied denied nied her the property The supreme court coun affirms the decision below In his brief the attorney attorn y for Leah Perks contends that the word marry should be construed in its technical meaning and that Poppleton so intend intended ed when he drew the will By marry again it was contended that the testa testator testator tor meant that relation which a single man and a single woman assume to toward toward ward each other by entering Into the marriage relation In other words the marriage intended by the deceased was the one the law permitted and none other Intention The supreme court however believes that the Intention of Poppleton was otherwise and that he meant a plural as well as any other sort of or a mar marriage marriage The court does not coincide with Leah Perks In her allegation that she never married Crabtree and as far as the will Is concerned declares that she Is his wife This conclusion is arrived at from the thera fact ra t all those concerned were Mor Mormons Mormons mons and at the time believed in po polygamy polygamy If the testator says the court had been living In and had been practicing the usual and customary domestic re relations relations lations as they the applied to those who ac accepted accepted and practiced the system of marriage then theil no doubt In using the term marry again It would be bo reasonable to suppose that he meant a monogamous mono amous marriage The testa tor however believed in a peculiar system tem of marriage and practiced that system system tem with the very person upon whose he Imposed the condition In Inthe Inthe the absence of anything else In his will to indicate the meaning of marry again that term might refer to either system Testators Point of View But in his will he speaks of only one woman as s his wife It thus seems clear that it was the intention of the testator to make provision for tor his dif different ferent families and he thus provided homes for each one of them In view of 01 the time at which the will was made and the state of the domestic relations then prevailing among many of the sect to which the testator and the wo women men mert belonged it is manifest that in his view marry again did not exclude a polygamous marriage From the find findings findIngs ings of the court it is clear that such a marriage as S the testator viewed the relation was w s gulte as moral and bind binding bindIng ing with respect to the persons enter entering enterIng ing into it as any other marriage would be beThe The decision was written by Justice Frick and concurred in by the other Justices |