The Oklahoma City times. [volume] (Oklahoma City, Okla.) 1908-1984, 1915-03-02
INDIAN WAY Of
WEDDING LEGAL
Supreme Court Holds that Pri-
mitiye Ceremony Holds Good
Under the Law.
SUPERIOR COURT ABOLISHED

Marriages between citizens Of the
Creek nation, according 10 usagcs and
customs Of the tribes where recognized
by the federal government, will be
deemed valid In the courts Of this
state, is held In an opinion by Jus
tlce Sharp, the decision being handed
down by the supreme court today. The
decision is In the case ofil. l.. Chan.
cey vs. W. J. Whinnery, appealed
from the district court Of Okmulgee
county The lower court In affirmed
The case Involved title TO land In
which the offspring Of an Indian man
and woman was Interested II was
cOntendrd that the marriage of the
two Indians was not legal because at
some time ln the past the Indian man
had another wife and had never 81.
cured u divorce The high court held
that the Burden OF proving the mar
riage Illegal rested upon the plaintiff.
Whore the county bOard Of com
miSsiourrs arranged for and allowed
u fee to the district clerk Of Grant
county prior to the passage ~ the
fec and salary bill they did 20 with
ont authority OF law, consequently a
suit to recover the money 80 paid 10
the clerk at that time viii lie. In an
other opinion by Justice sharp The
Judgment of the Grant county district
court Is reversed and remandod with
instructions 10 proceed to recover the
money paid out
Superior Court In Custer.
The appeal uf David Bradley VS..
the Farmers State bank from the Sc
quoyuh county court is dismissed In
an opinion by Justice sharp
In granting a writ Ot prohibition 10
restrain Judge J. W. LRwter 10 FUR
thcr exercise the duties " Judge Of
the superior court Of Custer county.
the supreme court today. In an opinion
by Justice Hardy, sustainS an act of
tho Legislature abOlishlng the Custer
county superior court
The superior court In that county
was established by a special act of the
legislature which had been upheld. II
was sought 10 disestablish the same
court by another act, and the latter
was attacked by those opposing the
writ on the grounds that II was uncOn.
stitutlonnl and that the net had not
been published and FOR the further
reason that It was local and special
legislation.
About Former Opinion.
Attention is called 10 the fpct TINT
the supreme court had held invalid the
act of the legislature II 1913 abolish.
Ing superior courts This the high
court, In the opinion by Justice Hardy
contends was of general nature. and
held Invalid because the legislature
had undertaken TO classify the dlf
ferent counties Of the state by Don
ulation on the basis Of the federal
census OF 1914, and was not prospective
In Its operation.
The act uf the legislature aholishlng
the Custer county superior court came
within the rightful jurisdiction of the
legislature, because II was a subject
upon which the Legislative branch OF
the government could legally act The
contention that II was special act and
local In It's nature is disposed Of by
the high court 10 the effect that An
act having to do in general way
with the subject leglaleted upon is not
special or local
The superior court " that county
was the only thing leglslatcd upon I'm
fact though 1t affected the general
Jurisdiction ~ the lower court A.
this court was created by the lAVis.
latiys branch " the state government
It could only be abolished BY the same
authority.
In the case of the Maryland Casual.
ty company j. W Smith and W f.
smith vs. the Town Of wpllston. an
pealed from the Lincoln county dis.
trict court the Judgment Is affirmed
IN an opinion boy Justice Hardy.