Show < SIXUUR LOGIC I I IN the Third District Court on Monday JudgeAnderson delivered a decision involving tho helrahln of illegitimate o3sprng It appeared lu full in the XEKS The claim of George H Cope son Qt1eW Thomas Cope deceased by a plural wife to a share In the distribution of the residue of the estate wasp Oll was-p ed by Janet Cope and Thomas II Cope lawful wife and EOn of decedent The decision h adverse to the claimant George H Cope The ground on which the opinion IsIs based Is-Is that the Territorial statute rjilch confers the status of helnbip upon the cliildreu of a male decedent without regard to their being born lawful wedlock I or not or as to whether the father did or did not rengmzethemin life is invalid According to fie judge theannul ment was produced by the Con gretaJonal antl polygamy law of 1SJ2 because the latter invalidated all laws that encouraged polyguuy It beet forth In the ruling that the Fur modal statute in ctttblishlng the hcirshlp of Illegitimati children chil-dren did encourage polygamy Judge Anderson teems to have completely overlooked the fact that Congress enacted In March iSSZ whatisknownnstheEdmundsAct H Has aim A expressly ngainit polygamy po-lygamy having been framed and passed for its suppression it is in > olnt to here quote from it the followIng fol-lowIng tectiou I Sfccriov 7 That the I TOO of Liga mons or polygamous maniagosknown as Jlormou marriage in cases In which such marriages have been solemnized sol-emnized according to the ceremonies of the Mormon sect In any Territory of the United States and such issue shall have been born before the firs day of i January Anno Domini eighteen hundred hun-dred and eighty three are hereby legitimated le-gitimated There are two points worthy of i I note connected with the de cLIon in question It conflictswith I the Kdmuuda law became according I I accord-ing to that measure which Judge Andir on has ignored George II Cope born long before Jan let I 1SS3 stands legally UJpru he world as the legitimate Mn of hers fathtr To declare that a legitimate issue of a decedent irnot an heir to hi etato I is a judicial abMirdllJ I Referring again to the position that the Territorial statute In question ques-tion encouraged polygamy according accord-ing to Judge Andersons logic to also does the The Edmund Congressional Con-gressional antl polygamy law This is I anothr judicial absurdity |