Show marriage Q question An Anal alizee izod editor CLIPPER in your issue of jan jail 1803 1893 your kays kaya kllc correspondent made inquiries about linvina published tile the names of parties receiving marriage licenses from the hie county clerk cleric thenintha then inthe in the i issue of the CLI R for f or the following f ollowa ng week jan sisla lie says there is much more in the request of having published monthly tho the names of par lies entering 0 into marriage relation than may appear in the article name named the marriage I 1 statute provides that persons shall not marry within the fourth degree of consanguinity the statue in this poin thas frequently been violated even own cousins have been known to go out of their own county to avoid exposure the ci arpi tt will be doing much good to point out to its read readers aers tile the evil results from such actions and maybe your correspondent respondent Lor blackstone would kindly point out the bad results legally to such gersoni who may be ignorant of the risk riak there must be something radically wrong wrong where parties wish w asli to avoid the publicity of their marriage amongst their neighbors and friends FRANK FRANIC then mr editor edito r in your last issue of the CLIPPER feb ard the learned blackstone appears with the following 0 noting the suggestions of your correspondent frank in last weeks issue relating to the legal consequences of breaking the marriage laws I 1 have looked the law up and find it a grave and serious serious matter the fourth degree of consanguinity goes to and includes ud es the relationship of first cousins as he has stated staled and I 1 quote the law on this matter section four of the edmunds buoker law reads that if any persons related to another person within and not including tle the fourth degree dearce of consanguinity 0 computed according to the rules of the civil law shall marry or cohabit with or have sexual intercourse with such other so related persons knowing tier her or him to be within said degree of relationship the persons so offending shall be deemed guilty of incest and on conviction thereof shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary not less than three years and not more than fifteen years so far as quoting the above section of the edmunds tucker law that is merely stating a matter of fact but what has it explained further simply nothing but blackstone says 1 I have looked the law up and then hu he sagely says the fourth degree of consanguinity goes to aud and includes the relationship of first cousins instating in stating that he has merely mentioned another fact ile he has not explained anything why first cumins may not legally or lawfully marry for they are not inhibited ai by the election of the law he be quotes nor for that matter by the new law passed by the territorial legislature in 1888 as t they hey are included within the fourth degree of consanguinity as blackstone himself has shown in the parga raph I 1 have quoted from but mr editor blackstone seems to think it is something awful for first cousins to marry for lie he dons his wig and ermine and settles himself down solemnly in ills his seat on the bench and proceeds to deliver his opinion in tile the case and says 11 1 I have looked the law up and find it a grave and serious matter I 1 low how profound his learning lear nhip 0 and all decision but his decision and judgment 0 would soon bo be reversed reve raed on oil appeal a to a superior super court but putting pulling joking 0 aside a frank objects to first cousins marrying 0 it may not always be advisable le for cousins to marry in all cases but that is not to the point tile the controversy is over the i law as they seem to thlick it forbids first cousins from marrying which it does not as before stated staled they are not included inside the fourth degree of consanguinity then what is the use of raising a tempest in a teapots BOUNTIFUL E eeb eb 4 1803 |