CHIL D. The son or daughter, in relation to the father or mother.
Illegitimate children are bastards. Legiti mate children are those born in lawful wed lock. Natural children are illegitimate chil dren. Posthumous children are those born after the death of the father.
Children born in lawful wedlock, or with in a competent time afterwards, are presum ed to be the issue of the father, and follow his condition; but this presumption may be repelled by the proof of such facts tending to establish non-intercourse as may satisfy a jury to the contrary; Field, Inf. 40; 3 C. & P. 215, 427; 13 Ves. Ch. 58; Cross v. Cross, 3 Paige, Ch. (N. Y.) 139, 23 Am. Dec. 778; Coin. v. Shepherd, 6 Binn. (Pa.) 286, 6 Am. Dec. 449; Barden v. Barden, 14 N. C. 548. See Blackburn v. Crawford, 3 Wall. (U. S.) 175, 18 L. Ed. 186. See ACCESS. Those born out of lawful. wedlock follow the condition of the mother.
The term children does not, ordinarily and properly speaking, comprehend grandchil dren, or issue generally ; yet sometimes that meaning is given to it in cases of necessity; 6 Co. 16; 14 Ves. 576; Adams v. Law, 17 How. (U. S.) 417, 15 L. Ed. 149; McGuire v. Westmoreland, 36 Ala. 594; Thomson v. Ludington, 104 Mass. 193. And it has been held to signify the same as issue, in cases where the testator, by using the terms chil dren and issue indiscriminately, showed his intention to use the former term in the sense of issue, so as to entitle grandchildren, etc., to take under it; 1 Ves. Sen. Ch. 196; Mowatt v. Carow, 7 Paige, Ch. (N. Y.) 328, 32 Am. Dec. 641; Ruff v. Rutherford, 1 Bail. Eq. (S. C.) 7; Dickinson v. Lee, 4 Watts (Pa.) 82, 28 Am. Dec. 684; 3 Greenl. Cruise, Dig. 213. See Walker v. Williamson, 25 Ga. 549; Appeal of Castner, 88 Pa. 478.
It is a rule of decision in England that the word "children" means legitimate chil dren ; 7 Ves. 458; 31 Ch. D. 542; L. R. 7 H. L. 568; and such is the general rule in this country ; Gardner v. Heyer, 2 Paige (N. Y.) 11; Heater v. Van Auken, 14 N. J. Eq. 159; Thompson v. McDonald, 22 N. C. 463; Gates v. Seibert, 157 Mo. 254, 57 S. W. 1065, 80 Am. St. Rep. 625; In re Scholl's Will, 100' Wis. 650, 76 N. W. 616; Bealafeld v. Slaugh enhaupt, 213 Pa. 565, 62 Atl. 1113 ; although illegitimate children may be considered as included by express designation or necessary implication; Stewart v. Stewart, 31 N. J. Eq. 398; Collins v. Hoxie, 9 Paige (N. Y.) 81; Bennett v. Toler, 15 Grat. (Va.) 588, 78
Am. Dec. 638; Morton's Estate v. Morton, 62 Neb. 420, 87 N. W. 182; and when the term is used in a will, there must he evidence to be collected from the will itself, or extrinsi cally, to show affirmatively that the testator intended that his illegitimate children should take, or they will not be included; 1 V. & B. 422 ; 4 Kent 346, 414, 419; 6 H. L. 265; Palmer v. Horn, 84 N. Y. 516. See BASTARD.
The question whether the term "child" can include "twins" is said not to have been raised in any English case, in 70 Alb. L. J. 2, where an interesting foreign case is noted, but no decision is stated. No American case on the point has been found.
Posthumous children inherit, in all cases, in like manner as if they had been born in the lifetime of the intestate and had sur vived him; 2 Greenl. Cruise, Dig. 135; 4 Kent 412. See 2 Washb. R. P. 439, 699.
In Pennsylvania ; act of 1836, p. 250 ; and in some other states ; Rhode Island, Rev. Stat. tit. xxiv. c. 154, § 10; Bancroft v. Ives, 3 Gray (Mass.) 367; the will Of their fathers or mothers in which no provision is made for them is revoked, as far as regards them, by operation of law; Coates v. Hughes, 3 Binn. (Pa.) 498; Barnes v. Barker, 5 Wash. 390, 31 Pac. 976. In Iowa a will is revoked by the birth of a child after its execution ; Ware v. Wisner, 50 Fed. 310. See, as to the law of Virginia on this subject, Armi stead v. Dangerfield, 3 Munf. (Va.) 20, 5 Am. Dec. 501.
An elaborate statute known as the Chil dren's Act, 1908, was passed December 21, 1908, in England to consolidate and amend the law on that subject. It consists of 134 sections covering the divisions of infant life protection, prevention of cruelty to children, juvenile smoking, reformatory and industrial schools, juvenile offenders and miscellaneous and general provisions ; L. R. 46 Stat. See AGE; IN VENTRE SA MERE. As to their competency as witnesses, see WITNESS. And see PARENT AND CHILD.
The courts construe these laws liberally as within the police powers of a state and they are generally upheld, the rule having I been laid down that the courts will not in terfere with the legislative action in regard to such regulations ; In re Weber, 149 Cal. 392, 86 Pac. 809. Statutes have been held constitutional forbidding the employment of children under twelve years of age in fac tories ; Starnes v. Mfg. Co., 147 N. C. 556, 61