The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1915-03-30
Lawyer sharps Asks General Assembly Not To Allow Wife
 To Change Daughters Name
tcontinuIed from Page D

Attorney o'Hara's letter to. the ju- dietary committee is as follows:
 Bridgeport, Conn,
 March 29th; 1915 The I11diciary Committee, Hon. E. L.
 Isben, Senate Chairman; Hon. W
 s. Hyde, House Chairman, Hart
 ford, Conn,
 In re petition of Helen Turney- sharps for change of name, etc Gentlemen:-
 1909. acting as counsel for Herbert E. sharne. the former husband of Helen Turney Sharps, and the father of Rhoda Marion Sharps, a minor, aged 14 years.
 This fact has been, and is well known to MT. Fillmore s. Banks. at present acting as counsel for Mrs #Sharps. and yet, I only learned of the pendency of the above petition rom our local newspapers on Thursday last Why notice of this matter should have been withheld from us-in view of the statute applying to petitions of this naturel am not able to say.
 It appeared in the newspapers, that the purpose of this petition is, to have the name of Marion" and to sunsti- the minor daughter changed to s'eTur- ney,,' and also that your committee had already concluded the hearing on the petition.
 InasnYuch as I am able to state in a letter of moderate length, the reasons why this petition so far as 1t relates, to the minor child should be denied, have decided not to ask for a sFe-hear- ing upon the matter.
 T enclose a certified copy of the dI- yorce decree, to show that the divorce was obtained by. the husband, and that the custody of the minor child is d1- vided between both parents.
 The termination of this marriage was due to a controversy which deve1- oped into a feud, between the father of Mrs. Sharps and her husband In this controversy, Mrs. Sharps-inf1u- enced it has been said by a threat that she would be disinherited8 if she re- mainedf neutral-fna11y took the part of her father and deserted. Mr. Sharps on February 18th. 1909.
 This feud and the divorce have left a situation of increasing bitterness, out of which this unusual petition has originated.
 The daughter of thees parents was named Marion after the mother of Mr. Sharps Since the divorce Mrs. Sharps has, without the consent of the father and against his protest, directed the daughter to discontinue the use of tehnalne of Marion and to substf- ute therefor the name of s'Turney-
 On the 18th of December last, MT. Sharps brought an action against Mrs. Sharps for a mandatory order or de- cree requiring her among other things to forthwith and during the minority of said Rhoda Marion Sharps. to in struct and require said minor child to resume and continue the use of the middle name of Marion and to dis continue the use of the name of sTur-s ney'''
 This action is now pending in the superior court for this county waiting trial
 Ever since the assertion by Mrs. Sharps, the affection of the father for his daughter has increased. He has fought for her custody and society by habeaus corpus proceedings and other wise, from August, 1909, until the date of the divorce. Through all the vicis- situdes of this litigation MT. sharps has, been steadfast in his devotion to the best interests of his child as he understood them. If there appeared. to be A lack of proper f1ial respect, he has attributed it-not to the natural impulses of his daughter-but to the influence of the hostile environment in which she is growing to wonaanhood In this respect, MT. Sharps measures to the full stature of a father.
 As to changing the name of Mrs Sharps: MT. Sharps gave her an op- portunity to have this done at the time the divorce was granted, because he had incorporated in his complaint a third claim for reIief-'tThat the name
 
 Sherman Turney,,' her maiden name. This change was then objected to, and it was not pressed by MT. Sharps. His position Is the same now as then, but she should apply to the court to have it done as provided by law.
 On the other hand, we most earnest ly protest against changing the name of the minor child, Rhoda Marion Sharps, and for the following reasons:
 l. It would be contrary to public policy of the legislature to do it; 1t would destroy the status which the law gives a child born in wedlock; and it would violate the immemorial rights of father
 2 There is no precedent to justify the general assembly to change the name of minor child, at the behest of one parent, and against the ob5ec- ton of the other.
 8. By section 551 of the Gen. stat utes the legislature has wisely vested in our supreme court the power and exclusive Jurisdiction over changing the names of persons.
 4. Section of the General Statutes provides that t'no petition shall be preferred to the general assembly for any relief which any court has power to grant.''