The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-06-13
''LEGAL,' CHILD
 IS ALSO ''LAWFUL"
Possession of $12,O00 Estate
 Hinges Upon Decision
ADOPTED CHILD IS HEIR
Fife A. Mix of Bridgeport Among Contesting Claim
 ants Who Were Defeated

Mrs. Minnie Miller. who lives in
 Milford, is to come into possession ot
 an estate somewhat in excess of $12,- 900 in value, if decision filed by Judge Burpee in the superior court is not upset by the supreme court l where, it is believed, the case will be taken by the other claimants.
 Mrs. Mary M. Burnham of South
 Windsor, died there in 1889. Some years before she died she executed a will and in the will she created a trust estate for the benefit of her son, Roland F. Burnham. The will provided that on the death of Ro- land, the estate remaining should go to his lawful child or children. MT. Burnham never had any children when Mrs. Miller was a child, he took her in legal adoption. MT. Burn ham died early this year and then it came time to distribute the estate in which he had life interest.
 There were no relatives of MT. his mothers side there were three of her nieces and one nephew living. The nephew was Edwin c. Hale of East Hartford, and the nieces were Mrs. Fife A. Mix of Bridgeport, Edith A. Northrop of Lynn, Mass, and Mrs.
 
 They made claim for the estate, Mrs. Miller also made claim and she filed an answer setting up that she was the '1egaI' child of MT. Burnham and as such she was entitled to the whole of the estate.
 The other claimants conceded that Mrs. Miller was the '1egaP' child, but that she was not the lawful child as the word was used in the will and that consequently she could not share in the estate. Lesle w. Newberry, the trustee, brought an action to have. the court say to which branch of the claimants the money should go After Mrs. Miller's answer was filed, Judge A. B. Beers of Bridge port and Judge l.. w. Cleaveland of New Haven filed demurrers to the answer Judge Burpee has filed decision in which he overrules the demurrers, thus supporting the claim of Mrs. Miller. In his memorandum of decision Judge Burpee says:
 ''The first reason of demurrer is that an adopted child is not a lawful child within the meaning of the will under consideration. The statute re- Iating to adoption uses the words le gal child but think the terms should be regarded as synonymous. More over, the statute provides that the person adopting the child shall be- come it's legal parent, with all the rights and duties between them of legitimate parent and child The testatrix evidently intended to desig- nate any person that the law would recognize as the child of her son.
 'eIn the second reason of demurrer, the objections stated are based rather upon antiquated defects in the pro- bate proceedings than on existing de- fects in the answer. It is assumed that the defendant, having seen fit to set out certain facts in these pro- ceedings has set out all of them. That is not true, nor was she bound to allege as much as she did. She claims, and it would be enough for her to state, that by reason of adop- ton she became the legal child of the testatrix's son. think she does so sufficiently for the purpose of pleading. What may happen when she attempts to prove this allegation is quite another matter.