The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-09-13
ANACONDA NEWS.
He wins HIS WIFE AGAIN
Charles II. Lucas the Victor in a
Unique Litigation.
HIS MARRIAGE Is LEGAL
Court Upholds Previously Contracted
Common Law Marriage as Against
Canonical Marriage = End of
Remarkable Case.

When Judge yelling Napton in the
district court yesterday granted the
prayer of the complainant in the case
of Charles H. Lucas against Lydia A.
Lucas there was decided one of the
most remarkable law suits ever tried in
Montana, and one that stands abso-
lutely unique in the history of Ameri-
can and English law.
Charles H. Lucas brought suit against
his wife to have declared legal a COM
mon law marriage existing between
himself and Lydia A. Lucas. To this
suit the defendant demurred, the de-
murrer was overruled, judgment was
ordered by default and then Richard
William Gillespie came in, prayed and
was allowed permission to open up the
case and make answer and did SO, de-
claring the woman to be his true and
lawful wife and asking that Lucas
prayer be denied. This entrance of a
third party into a suit of this character
is unparalleled.
1t was the legal fight for remark
able stake-the right to call one woman
wife. In the annals of litigation. run
ming back to before the time OF Henry
VIII, there is no case like this.
In rendering the decision Judge Nap
ton followed a decision of his father,
Judge Napton of the supreme court of
Missouri, in a case involving the legal
ity of a common law marriage.
In the Lucas case the facts, briefly
stated, are these: In May, 1893, at Chi
cago, the two, with the intent of be-
coming man and wife, lived and CO.
habited together and held themselves
out to the world to be man and wife,
and so lived until June, 1898, all the
time the woman calling herself and
signing her name Mrs. Lucas" Two
children, boy named Lilas and now
aged five years, and a girl, named
Della NJ, now aged three years, were
born as the fruit of this union. 1t
should be remembered that Mr. Lucas
intention in bringing the suit was to
legitimate tie the birth of these children.
To resume the story of the Lucas
family Leaving Chicago they had
moved about in the west and finally
located at Maple creek, a town near
Medicine Hat in the Canadian North
west territory. While living there in
March, 1898, Lucas met Richard Will
lam Gillespie and introduced him to
Mrs. Lucas. In some manner Gillespie
learned of the fact that Mr.. and Mrs.
Lucas had never had a marriage cere-
mony performed. He made love to
Mrs. Lucas, with the result that June
81, 1898, while Mr.. Lucas was away
from home he persuaded Mrs. Lucas to
take her children and considerable of
their personal effects and flee the coun-
try. On June "A Gillespie and Mrs.
Lucas We're married by Rev. w. Rid
ley of the Church of England at Leth-
bridge.
Mr.. Lucas pursued and overlook them
at Shelby Junction, this state, where he
secured the children. He commenced
legal proceedings against the couple for
taking his household goods, but dis
missed these on securing from his wife
a written agreement, signed before
William Dawes, J. p, in Marias town
ship, Teton county, July 2, 1898, by
which she agreed he was to have the
custody of the children alternate
months.
Then Lucas removed to Deer Lodge,
in this county, with the children and
has since been living there. The wo-
man tired of Gillespie after some
months, left him and went to Deer
Lodge, where she has been living apart
from Lucas but having the custody of
the children.
Realizing that to save the children
from being branded as illegitimate he
must take some action, Lucas consulted
Attorney ]. M. Simpson, who, on his
behalf. brought the suit to validate the
common law marriage, filing the suit
June 10 last. The demurrer made by
Mrs. Lucas is understood to have been
purely a formal move made to get the
matter properly before the court. After
the matter had apparently been set
tied Gillespie came into court July %
with his demand to be allowed to make
defense, and claimed the woman as
wife. By his attorneys, Duffy q Casey,
ne protested the common law marriage
between Lucas and the woman was
void. On this contention the case was
reopened and fought.
In submitting the question to Judge
Napton Attorney Simpson, attorney for
Lucas, filed an exhaustive brief cover
ing the question of the validity of COM
mon law marriages. hanging his con-
tenton chiefly upon section SO OF the
civil code of Montana, as follows:
Marriage is a personal relation aris-
Ing out of civil contract, to which the
consent of parties capable of making II
is necessary. Consent alone will not
constitute marriage: it must be fol-
lowed by solemnization, or by mu-
tual and public assumption of the mar
ital relation"
After citing several other sections
bearing on the case the brief refers to
It. loo;Sio, rapdarad hy the elder Nap