OCR Text |
Show j. rravcrtr TtishN I"""'. nd irri.iiTunh.Dui.i.. ,. win op tub unitpj. . lK7.-0cloUr Term, ISM. 11 cot. oipHnt, Jnt ".Cm.CouttoflhuT.,,. 1 nLl.it. Court of Ball !. Couu-0,I2IM Couu-0,I2IM the. Uisttlcl Court of tfwi.uiiit.fuuh, ftrj.tbr-il jitiio.. of in- . m Ccnirt of Hi. Territory. ,1 -ibn ias, whether door-. II. ilXirUnlllni.t.cl.lUofri.om.. ,,unJ.rtl..fUofth.co, rV , hIr of ThomM Co, dweMod. Blll,MMtollowit 1 Tbt Thoinai for. Uwfml. iiii.triiltl. County, Utah Terr i?Ustal, on tha-uny of August, hft baric carta n rwele-ataletlitri-lii, 21 .tair tfion of which l Immaterial. :n.l U Thorns. Jr loft at mlllnuiof bU UmMl HUrTltlllK llllll, ji 0,1 bit only Icitlllmata son.aml Lml .tV-r.'il IIUlliiit.Mnby ItoKrat Col, hln IwlJKumou. or jlril wife, aud tht Hi. marrlago of fhJuldu.cUwl with Mararrti;oij .uronlrKtol vrhlla Hi. sallJai.-t rw Ih. llTlnit aiiJu.iJlYi.rcod ills of said l"""1' , , ,. . AoJ a conclusions of lavv thu court lTrist th. aololiclrs at law of said nomas Co,lafd, arc Jauel Coi MjTIioinas It. Cop., who ar atom tSmW ItTsharo lu III. ellstrllHitlon of KaMtatsof saU ThomM Co. anil ckel ill lb. real Ht abovo mentlonoel Srle-sri'lsd to d Ye-stesl III Mid JintlOoi an I Tlioraaa II. t'ow, sul-jKt sul-jKt to l) adinlulitratlou Uou such "Tbt tin ld (leorgo II. Corw Is not an Mr of ali Thomas Co, ila-nutJ.and ila-nutJ.and not rntltlnl tosnysuaro awliTbomaiCop.'aMtalc. Mr. Juitlca Hruwn dcllrcml In. Miction of Iho court. fbsarrllant, OwrmII.Coi, who U aJmlitkl to bo Hi. iTlrRlllmal. child cf Trwnm Uoa, by Margaret C'ok, bli polrmoui wife, clalm tho right lolobdltaibars of hla father's eslatu unJtr a territorial alahito of Utah, turtrd In 13.', which iiroYlJril at fo. Liwi. flection St. lllegltlmata child, rto and th'lr toothers Inherit In llko Binner" Imlllwata "from the titer, whether acknowledged by him u not, rroYlJed II shall bo mad. to ap Car to the tatlifactlon of III. court lit be ww the father o'Mtcli lllrgltloi-ate lllrgltloi-ate child or children ' hllo Uil. natuto la an Innovation upon lb. common law, and In aotno leitiruUn a novelty liiliKl'latlou. wo i.rctlTu 110 otjrctlon to 1U vallllty. lir tpctlon 0 of Hie act of Heptcmbt r V, m, 8 HUt. at IJirRc, I)!, ntalillihlliK 1 territorial Kovernnient for Utah, It It r rovldedi " That the leKlalatlva power cf Mid Territory ahall ritend to all rlgbtful euljectj of lenUbitlou, con Ijteat with th. Corulltntloii of tha 'llil Htateeand Iha provliloutof tlili act; but no l thall l paawd Interfer-lur Interfer-lur with th. primary dlwiHof tho roll, no tax ahall be Impoevd ujion th. pnrtyftheUnltalrUatM, norehall tbe landi or otlier property of non reel dtnti be Uiud hUher than the laada or other rortyof rMldeuU. All the Uwi ed by the linUIatlvo ammbly aa governor iball lw uinnltle.l to th. Uongrna of th. United Hlali-e, and, If dliiroved, uliall ba null and of no ffu" Itli th. excel tlona noted In U1I1 eectlon, th. ower of thoTirrl. totlal leglilatur. wu appanntly a plenary aa that of th. IxcUlatura of aHute Manard ra. Hill. 125 U.H. til ThodlntribuUonof and th. rleht ol ncceHlon to tha retatea of il waaxtl lerwni are mattcra aaclutlvely of rinte roRtilunre, an are inch ai were within the competenc. of the Terrl-Urlal Terrl-Urlal hiUlatura to deal with II aa It w fit. In the alaenca of an Inhibition by Uooirew. Induid, legUlatlon of InlhrdMsrlillpQui bj nomraui un. Brecedeoted. Iiy tho Uwaof many utei natural chllJren ar. parmltted to Inherit from Iha mother, ami abio from the father In catn of tho after nurlBo cflliilr tarrnla, or when there are no lawful children, or where an adortioh li made In duo form, or where recognition li ruailo by will. AnJ Iftlia ipintlon of parental;, bo iitUfactorlly aetUed, there would eeem tebeppwrrliitboleit!hitur.i tomdow era. Iha children ol au adultermia In. rcoonawllh Inheritable blood from Ut ftther. IjeilUltttlon almlUInK lllenlllmal. . JaTn !? ,.n .rlht of luccoaalon ! undoubtedly In Ueroaatlon of thu com. won law, and r-hnuld I atrlctly con. Mnied, and nnre It haiiteneralh liven Jmi i ' '" '"" pcrnilttlmr, euoli J?..-"?'. VV". I'nta have tlncu Furrled. to luhcrlt do not i ly to tha we of an acjulteroua lneroour. Bit whllo It U tho Uutyof thu court .1 W . ."""'rucUon uiwn aUtuteo, wbfchihall.ioraraaimifblo, ba con-onr.t con-onr.t with koo.1 month, wn know of n lfi!l principle which would author, lu."' r. li"!ouiico eutute of this Si.' nhlf.h ' I u.ln nJ unamblBiioiu Ji to !"" to our own aland, aw of kh.1,1 ,d moral ohllifatlone. ru to Heal h m, theaa eul Jelta,and,lii J.a5c ",ta ' ll"" "n, are b." JBdotir control. Thut In irewer'a t!M?iTv1,lK"!U,r' u 1', 17i 1M. it t.ulJ by. 'Mr; Chief Ju,tho 'Taney, JiSJ"" '"' thl. court, that the ex. I.ncyaiKl moral tendency of aalml. ta..T,iM.",'u,.'u",,or "" ''Klabi-h.M ''Klabi-h.M ?.;'" il court, and It waa drJr7ii?h'in,,,,,rl.Br' '"llllliual. chll. "? 'tli luhantalila blood, at r lied to "wrelh. off-prlng 'o( an , I ia-C"uou. ia-C"uou. connection. Ifai f. Irlll,,l "i.tlm.thl. act thl.ffi?,Utul',1'J i" 'a of n.nlni?ucburrl,lrrln ,u oiratlon Sit It V.h"iHUt,:". nJ Terrltorle., Sit at n y . WJ ln ''.'.nauof thli JJi that Hie children embrace,! by It PwuIl..ml,,, U U"JU,t to Y'" wcl!. Tnl1' TO"""l"'n. of their If Iha ae? i fci 1 ? 'M1U'" the validity H.n ?.? ct "..ln " naluw of a punlili. SS uKS.'V", ',uf ' wl," ' atber iif..' '""a.,t ntu"' channel, lilll.ii,V.U '"V,IIJ l to treat tho It la coulended by rendentx, how. ever. Hint even conceding the validity ofthleitatuto, It wu abroKtlrd and annulled by lh. AntM'olynamy Act of t'onitriaa of July I, imS, 12 rltot. at lxirge, Ml, thu n-cjnd acctlon of which annul by title the ordinance for lh. Incorporation of th. Mormon Church, and tin n adda. "An I all otlu r acta and Arta tf acta heretofore paucd by the aald lrglalatlvo awnnl.lv of the Territory of Utah, which e-labllth, e-labllth, aupiorl, maintain, ihleld, or countiinnre Iwljgamy, Iv, and the aame lunby are, Ulnn roved mil annullej- fnMei, That tills act thall li to limited and conatrueit aa n,t to allector luterfire with tho rlht of property legally aoulnd under the ordinance heretofore mentioned, nor with the rlsht 'to noreulp Uod accord. Idz tolliedlctitea of cuniclence,' hut only to nnmil all acta and I iw which ostablUh, miliitalu, rotect, or coun. lenanre the r.cllce of polyuamy, etc, Aa till act wav pauo I btforn the death of Thoaiai CopM, an I of course Uforu dutceut cvt ujioii 111 ihlllrtu, It ap. plka to Idle caw If lh. nrumrnt uf reepondenta be auund. The i leetl m la then preacuteil, doia thu Territorial acl uf lb,2 ctUlllih, vupert, malnttln, hleld or countenance polygaoi7 It clearly dota licit latallUh, tuMwit or maintain It. Dxi It ahleld or cwiu lenancu It? It doia not declare the child an of nolricimoui marrlaitea In In leijltlmite; ln fact, It treata them ni lllujtltimate, omther, It doea not, ex. cet by Indirection orlnfinnco, im-ii. Hon tlnui at all, but It iu all lllrnlll-male lllrnlll-male (chlldreii, whethir Iho frulu of imlyKamiua or of ordinary nlulteroue or Illicit Intercourac, iiou nn i.iitlliy an I veele thcui with luhetltal le blood. Notliln 11 bolter aettled than (hit repeala, an I the aimemiy be aald of annulinenta, by Implication, are net favored by tho iniirta, anl that no tatule will bo conatmeil na rcTnllng n prlorone Unleaa ao thntly reiuinant thereto aa to admit of n i other niwu able cotiatructloii. MctJool v. Hnillh, I lllack, 439, lliiven V. t.ei,, S J til. Hi; l'.x partn Viruer. 8 Wall, M, lin, I uruiauv. Xlohol, 8 Wall, 41, Unite,! ritateav.Hlxty aeveu l'uckage.,17 How, r; lied Hock v. Henry, 1UJ U.H, S9ll. Ill order to aubect the Territorial net of IMS to the annullliij clauie of the act of Oougrew, in tendency to ahlel I or countenaiuo tyir,imy ehould be dinct and unuilatikablc. No law will bo declired vol I bocaun, It may Indirectly, or by n poiwIMo and not a neceaaary corutructlon, bo riaiguant loan nuujllln att. Ha direct nrd proxlaiate multa nraalon. to ho con-aldered. con-aldered. While, aa before olmrvul, the act miy have burn amh1 In view of the Dilating tatn of thlnga, and aa an Indirect method of rocognlilng the legitimacy of ly. eamoua chlldreii, Ithia m tendency lnltwlftoehleldor couuleuaucepol camya) faraa It appllea to chlllren. Legfalallou for tho protection of chll dren born lit polygamy la notueca-Kirlly notueca-Kirlly legltlillon favorable lo uli gamy, ihrro la no lnconalitcncy In ahlelJIng the one and lu denouncing the other aa a crime, 1 1 haa noi t r been mippowd that the aita of thu aeveral Htatea legltluutlng natural children, whoaeparenta lutirmarry after llielr birth, had tho allghtoat Icndeucy lo ahleld or countenance Illicit cohabitation, cohabita-tion, but they were rather dealgudl lo protect the unfortunate children uf ihoae who were willing to do all In their power towarda righting a grwxt wrong. r), If the act lu miction had been jwueed lu any other Jurisdiction, It would have beeu conaldered aa a perfectly harmleaa, though poMlbly In-illacreit, In-illacreit, .xarviaa of the IcglaUtlve power, and would not bo aurloualy tlalmoJ aa a tep lownrda thetaUb Itahmentof a Iwlygamona ayatern. Aathlaactaunuu only aucli Territorial Terri-torial lawaaa ihleld or counUname tulygimy, If we tuttalii tho conatruc-liou conatruc-liou urxl by th. reapon lenta hern. It muat necewarlly follow that thoilill-dreuof thoilill-dreuof inlvgamoua marriage! woull liodenrfvod of Ihtlr lower to Inhirlt from ih. falher, while the oltiprlu ; of otlier Illicit relatione would bu left lu Inherit under the tuU Tlila would eeem to lie at war with the Intent of the lcglalalure. ilut whatever doubbi there may lie regarding the (roper cuuatruitlon of thla act, we think they aredla tadledbyaacrutlny of the aubwiuent leglalatlon ii)u the aamo niljcct. In le7e lh. leglakture of Utah, Ulng evidently In aomo doubt aa to thu proper pro-per Interpretation of the Congrca-aloual Congrca-aloual act of 1SU2, pnaaed another act declaring Uiat "overy Illegitimate child la. In all caauo, an heir to 1U mother. 1 1 la alto heir lo lla father w hen acknowledged by him." Thla waa followed March if.', Hi:', by an net of CongreM, commonly knnwu aa tho Tdmundalaiv, J mat. at Large, 81, whlcli, while irovldlng for further lunlahmunt for polgamy and Ita ao-lUiiipanjIiigevlU1, ao-lUiiipanjIiigevlU1, In eecUon 7 expreaa-ly expreaa-ly hiltliiiatee the laau. of polygamoua ur Mormon marriages lorn rlur to January 1, 1S1 1. If th. Territorial m.t of IBSJImi open to thochnrge of shield. Ing or oounteuanclug polygamy, much inure ao la thla act, which not only admlta polygamoua children to the rlghtof Inheritance, but actually Iriri-tlmatce Iriri-tlmatce them for all jiurjioava. Tho law remained subelantlaily In this condition con-dition until March 3, 1SS7, when the act of CongreM known as the l.J. mumli. Tucker law, 24 Htat, at Large, (M, waa lauwal, Iho lllli tettlull of whlcli rruvldia that "the laws emu lid by tholighilaleeiuiM.mbly of tho Territory Ter-ritory of Utah whlcli provide fur or recognise the capacity of Illegitimate chll Ire n to Inherit, or lo bo entltlod lo any dMrlbutliushare In, Iheealnteof the father of any surh Illegitimate child, are herediy dlaapprovci and an-liulleil;nnd an-liulleil;nnd no Illegitimate chill shall hereafter be entitled to Inherit from his or her father, or to rive he any distributive share In the estate of his or her father; JVuialul, That this section sec-tion ahall not apply to uny llhgltlmate child bom within twelve inoutha after the parage of Ihls act, nor lo any child mad. legitimate by tliajth aoetlou ol the act of 169.', Here, then, la the first clear aud ua-Quallrtct ua-Quallrtct declaration of Congruei of ita uleappruval of the legislation of Utah recognising thu Inheritable capacity of Uie Imu. of iioPj gamoua marrlngea,aiul so (an nil la Congrewof right ojulrnl orexlatiug uuder Iheae laws that It eioei la by special proviso all children declared to be lefltlmato by tho 7!h aeitlou of the act of IS1.', aa n ell aa all HhMlthiutu chllJren born within twelve months utter the p.uaage of this act. Those several nets of CongreM, di si-Ing si-Ing asthey do witli thesunemljeet. matter, should be eoimtrueil not only na eiproealng the Intention of Conkreu at the date, the several acta were imihcjil, but the later acta should aim lie regarded as legislative Interi rvta tlonsof the prli rones. United BUtn v. Freeman, Howard, 3M,fl(l I, Htnck. dale v. I neuratu e Co , 15) Wall, H.. .Sow If It had boon Intended by the act of UHJbiaunul the Territorial ail of 193.2, tUlug th. luborlUbla (,aaclty of Illegitimate chlMren, why did Coil grrssln lHS2recognlrthe legitimacy of chlblrcn Inru of ilygvmoua or Mormon marriages, prior to Janu try I IS93? Urwhy, in Ihnact of la7 did It save tha tlghta of such chlllrenne well as of alltitheni born within twelve months after the Asjgo of that act4 The olject of llieio imactments Is en tlrely clear. Not only doe Uongrve refrain from ad ling to the odium which pojailar c Inl hi vlalta ujion this Innocent but uiifor'unale class of chll dren, but It niskea them the specltl olject of Its eollcttu le, ami at the same llineoliin tohe mrent an Inducc-mrnl, Inducc-mrnl, In Hie nature of a I km I rnllcn-thr. rnllcn-thr. to discontinue llielr unlawful co-halillalloti. co-halillalloti. Ourconclutton Is that theaprielbnl Oeonre A. Cope Is entitled to ahare In hla father's estate, and the decree of Iho Hiiprcme ('mill of the Territory mil it, therefore, bo reversed. |