The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-05-22
LEGALITY OF A sOUAw MARRIAGE.
A Relative OF Chief Seattle Proves
Claim to His Fathers Estate.

PoRr MADISON. May 21.--fSpecial. THE
most important cause which perhaps has
ever arisen in this county. and one of the
most remarkable that has been before any
court in the state, has just closed here.
after consuming the whole week past. 1t
was the case of Charles Kelley against the
county of Kitsap and Theodore Williams.
administrator of the estate of Michael
Kelley. The importance of the cause re-
suits from the far-reaching consequences
of its results.
In 1860, when the county was sparsely
settled, and few white women were here,
it was the admitted custom af many of the
old settlers TO take Indian women and live
with them as wives; many men
paid for them while as many more
by mutual arrangement lived together.
Among those old pioneers was an Irish
man, Michael Kelley, who lived at Port
Orchard. He became of consequence in
the county, having been twice elected
county commissioner. He look for his
house companion an Indian woman of
the Seattle tribe, Julia Descarte by name,
and niece of Chief Seattle. for whom the
city of Seattle was named. Kelley, as
shown by the testimony, gave to the
womans relatives 81. and she left her
tribe, dissolving her relations with them,
and lived with Kelley. After she
left him child was born to
her, who was the plaintiff in
the action. In the meantime Kelley be-
gan the business of saw milling and hotel
keeping, and made considerable money
and invested it in land around Blakeley
and elsewhere. He was, as disclosed by
= ha< MI hi
chase sawmill. and while having some
thousands of dollars in his possession.
murdered; this was in 1869. In 1870 his
estate was administered upon, then of
value 5000 or $1,000, and after debts were
paid remaining balance of 81 $50, with
interest amounting to probably s., 900, was
placed by the administrator in the
treasury of the county, because OF no
then discovered legal heirs, and was after
ward escheated to the state. The child
Kelley in the meantime was being reared
by an old friend. his mother having died in
1855. He is now % years of age, rather
bright and industrious. bearing, however,
the stamp of his tribe on his mothers
side-somewhat tiat-headed and very dark.
languid and careless OF manner. After
consultation, the boys friends concluded
10 test MS right 10 the property lett by his
father. The BOY was represented by James
Hamilton Lewis, Of Seattle, the county
was defended by County Attorney Fuller,
assisted By Judge w. S. Church, of Own
pia, who was especially retained to defend
this cause.
The main point in the controversy was
the legality of the marriage or association
out of which the BOY was born. The an
cient customs of the Indians were proved,
their marriage rites. among themselves:
also that when 3 white man took an In
dian woman for his companion he paid a
sum of money TO her relatives, and she
afterwards lived in open recognition by
all the people of those times in the COM
munity where they lived. This fact and
these customs were contended bv Colonel
Lewis as establishing a marriage and le-
gi,lmatizlng the issue. He claimed that