Date Posted:14:09 Author: Mike Drake - 1 Jun 2001 Subject: Re: Yogananda's In reply to:
Mukund - 6 Jun 2001
's message, "Re: Yogananda's" on 14:07
For the reasons stated above ("Response to Ketch"), I doubt Yogananda was referring to any California law, and I think the issue is a red herring. Nonetheless, I looked the law up.
At the time of the ouster, California's miscegenation statute Civil Code section 69 provided that “no license may be issued authorizing the marriage of a white person with a Negro, mulatto, Mongolian or member of the Malay race.” (As such, any such marriage was legally void. Civil Code Section 60.)
If the law was applicable to Chowdhury's marriage, why did California issue a marriage license? The answer is deceptively simple: Section 60 does not include 'Indians' or 'Hindus'! See Perez v. Lippold, 198 P.2d 17, 22 (CAL. 1948).
