Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. Clerk stated that it mentioned in the defences, Sir Francis had granted his bond to Mr. Scott for 20,000l. Was that fact denied? He called upon his learned brother to admit or deny that most important feature in this case.

Mr. Cathcart requested Mr. Jeffrey, who was absent, might be sent for. Mr. Clerk repeated the question. Mr. Jeffrey answered that they denied all the scandalous and calumnious part of the defence.

Lord Meadowbank observed, that they had denied the whole, positively denied every fact; and that Mr. Scott, in the absence of his Counsel, offered to meet the denial by real evidence.

Mr. Jeffrey answered, that he would not deny the 20,0001. bond, but he denied that it was granted for any such purpose as that stated in the defence.

Mr. Clerk begged to put his learned friends upon their guard as to the question he was going to put. He averred, that after Sir Francis Burdett had executed and delivered his bond to his client, he engaged to pay 10,0001. upon that bond. That Sir Francis afterwards excused himself, and said it was not in his power; and in fact he only paid 5,0001. Mr. Clerk asked, was this true or false? The other Counsel not answering, he said, the Counsel for Sir Francis ought to be prepared either to admit or dey every fact stated in the defence. That Mr. Scott under the circumstances of the case, and in the exercise of his discretion was content with his 3,040, and did not call upon Sir Francis for farther payment. That he alwas insisted, in every stage of this business, that he would retain this money for a certain infant, and that no other person but that infant should have it. That this would be proved by the most satisfactory evidence. That Mr. Scott, to satisfy his own honour, and that this money should not by any accident become his own private property, executed his bond for it at a time when he held Sir Francis Burdett's bond to the extent of 15,0001. undischarged. Mr. Scott delivered this bond to a respectable gentleman, to be retained by him for a certain time, and if the infant should be then dead, Sir Francis was to have the bond delivered to him; if not, it was to be discharged, and not delivered to him.

Lord Meadowbank allowed Mr. Scott to give in a condescendence of what he offered to prove, and Sir Francis Burdett to answer it.

Consistory Court, Doctors' Commons, July 16.

DALRYMPLE 7. DALRYMPLE.

This was a suit at the instance of Mrs. Dalrymple, formerly Miss Gordon, for a restitution of conjugal rights, as the wife, by the law of Scotland, of Captain John William Henry Dalrymple, a son of the late General Dalrymple.

It appeared that Captain D. accompanying his regiment to Edinburgh, was there first introduced to Miss Gordon; they conceived a mutual regard for each other, which ended in a matrimonial contract. Family circumstances, however, rendering it necessary, as he persuaded her, that the knowledge of the marriage should be concealed during the life-time of his father, Miss Gordon yielded to his injunctions of secrecy, and they accordingly exchanged mutual written promises to this purport: 'I do solemnly promise, as soon as it is in my power, to marry you, and never any other person.' Upon the faith of these promises, they conducted themselves towards each other as man and wife, and at a subsequent period exchanged farther acknowledgments of the relation in which they stood to each other, to this purport: I hereby acknowledge John William Henry

Dal

Dalrymple to be my lawful husband;' and, I hereby acknowledge Johanna Gordon to be my lawful wife; and signed respectively. Upon Captain Dalrymple's departure with his regiment from Scotland, he obtained a written promise of secrecy from Miss Gordon, in which she declares, that nothing but the strongest necessity, a necessity which circumstances alone could justify, should ever force her to declare her marriage with him.' He continued earnestly his injunctions to her on this head, till almost the very moment of his departure from England; constantly addressing her by letter from Portsmouth, and even when abroad, and pointing out to her the agency of Sir Rupert George as the channel of their communication. Some time afterwards the correspondence was disconti nued on his part, and Miss Gordon in consequence wrote to his father to ascertain his address. Upon being apprised of this, he directed a confidential friend, Mr. Hawkins, of Brighton, to intercept her letters to his father; but this gentleman finding considerable difficulty in such a service, wrote to her himself to discontinue the correspondence; and General Dalrymple dying about this time, Miss Gordon considering herself released from her promise of secrecy, immediately made a frank avowal to Mr. Hawkins of the nature of her situation with Captain Dalrymple. He shortly afterwards returned very unexpectedly from Malta: and in a conversation with Mr. Hawkins, hinted it his determination of abandoning his connection with Miss Gordon. This gentleman used every argument to dissuade him from such a purpose, and as he had reason from his conduct to think with suc cess; but in a day or two afterwards, he was surprised to hear of Captain D.'s marriage with Miss Manners, a sister of the Duchess of St. Albans. This coming to the knowledge of Miss Gordon, she in justice to her own rights commenced the present suit.

The validity of a marriage of this description, according to the law of Scotland, being the principal question in the case, the opinions and exposition of that law, by its most eminent professors of the present day, formed the principal part of the evidence, accompanied by the production of many of the letters that passed in the course of the transaction.

A very learned and ingenious argument took place upon this subject. The counsel for Miss Gordon contended, that from this evidence, it ap peared the Scotch law recognized three modes of marriage as binding upon the parties—the first was, a consent per verba de præsenti, by which the parties assume the marriage contract between them from that moment; the second was, a promise to solemnize matrimony at a future period, and an intercourse between the parties upon the faith of that promise; and the third was by public acknowledgments of being man and wife, letters in the conjugal stile, &c. from which the actual existence of the marriage contract was by law presumed. The learned advocates, from a review of all the circumstances of the case, then proceeded to contend that the marriage in question clearly came within all the three modes specified, and the court was therefore bound to give operation to it.

This construction of the law was denied by the counsel on the other side, who, from their comments upon the evidence, contended, that it would warrant no other construction than that of an obligation upon Captain Dalrymple to perform the nuptial engagement at a future period, but upon a condition of secrecy; that that condition not having been complied with, he was released.

Sir William Scott, in a learned and elaborate, yet perspicuous speech, recapitulated the evidence, and delivered the judgment of the court. He observed, that the question must be decided by the law of England, though by reference to that of Scotland; for it was a proposition beyond the

reach

1

reach of argument upon any principle of law in civilized states, that if the first marriage was legally good, the second was legally bad. According to the judgment of the eminent men examined, Mr. Dalrymple was suffici ently a domicile resident, and of sufficient age to contract matrimony in Scotland, though a minor by the laws of England; for the same law that gives him that power supposes a sufficient discretion in its exercise. By the Scotch law, too, consensus non concubitus facit matrimonium, and that without the intervention of a priest; it was a civil contract, and consent was the very essence of a contract, and was, therefore, equally so in this, to which heaven was a witness. This, too, was conformable to the ancient canon-law derived from the theological principles of the religion of Europe, and till the Council of Trent the consent of two parties was deemed a sufficient marriage; afterwards three sorts of marriage only were allowed: reglar, which were complete both in civil and religious requisites; irregular, which were only civil contracts, and wanted the religious ceremony; and promises of marriage at a future period, followed by conjugal rites. The Statute of the 26th of George III. however, swept away all three doctres in England. The court would not itself trace the progress of the Soch law farther than that it was derived from the Roman canon law, but that purpose must look to Scotch authorities. The learned judge then view of the opinions of the Scotch professors, from which he inferred that a most of them agreed in points conformable to the old canon law, that that law must be the basis of the Scotch law, and consent, therefore, was the real marriage of Scotland. He then referred to the text authorities, and thence to the decisions of the Scotch courts confirmatory of that doctrine; and, applying that to the circumstances of the present case, was dearly of opinion that the marriage was a valid one, and that the lady had sed no unnecessary delay in claiming her remedy. He pronounced, therefore, that her claim to conjugal rights was a just one, and that Mr. Dalrymple was bound to receive and treat her accordingly.

Court of Peculiars, Doctors' Commons, JULY 10.

SMITH against HEWSON, falsely called SMITH.

This was a proceeding at the instance of Mr. Henry Staple Smith, of Croydon, to annul a marriage he had contracted with Miss Smith, of the same place, on the ground of minority and non-consent, the marriage having been solemnized by licence.

It appeared in evidence that Mr. Hewson, the father of the young lady, Fs living, and Mr. Smith's addresses to his daughter were sanctioned by Es approbation from a conviction, as he frequently declared, of his being an industrious young man, more likely to get forward in business than many possessing greater affluence, and that he should feel happy in seeing his daughter so well settled. Mr. Smith accordingly visited the family in the character of an accepted lover, and induced the young lady a short time afterwards to consent to a private marriage, pretending that his not yet being in business for himself rendered secrecy for a short time necessary; the father being seized with a paralytic stroke did not long survive, and the present suit was subsequently commenced.

On the part of Mr. Smith it was contended, that though Mr. Hewson did not object to his addresses, there was no reason to believe he would have consented to the marriage taking place when it did; indeed, the young man not being in business, and many other reasons, afforded sufficient ground

to presume a want of consent, where no direct proof of the reverse was adduced.

On behalf of the lady it was contended, that a consent must be presumed from the addresses being sanctioned, and that this inference was further supported by a variety of declarations appearing in evidence to have been made by the father, upon a supposition of the probability of such an union, though there might not be very conclusive proof of his knowledge of its having actually taken place.

Sir J. Nicholl observed, that the legal presumption of a case of this nature was always in favour of the fact of marriage, and of the requisites of the law having been complied with, and this presumption was not a little strengthened by the suit not being brought in the present case by the minor who must be the injured party, if any injury there was, but by the party who had obtained the license for the marriage upon his own perjury; for it was not to be supposed but that he was aware of the lady's minority. His coming into Court, then, with a suit grounded upon his own corrupt act, and the legal presumption against him, rendered it necessary that the proof of non-consent to be furnished by him should be very strong and conclusive, indeed almost amounting to a dissent; he did not mean to say that a conditional or limited consent might not be given, or that that consent might not be retracted, but where the courtship is encouraged without any limitation or restriction as to the time or other circumstances of the mar riage, a general consent was to be presumed. In this case, the father being dead, could not prove his non-consent, but the brother and others of the family prove the courtship to have been with his sanction, and the witnesses who depose to the non-consent seem to mean that it was not directly given with a knowledge of the marriage being about to take place. Sir John further observed, that if the conduct and character of the young woman could be judged of from the letters before the Court, she was well worthy of the husband's choice, and ought to have received different treatment from him. Upon the whole of the evidence, therefore, he was of opinion, that the presumption of a direct or implied consent of the father to the marriage was sufficiently apparent to justify the Court in giving, by its sentence, legality to that transaction, and dismissing the suit; which was done accordingly.

PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.

RESOLUTIONS MOVED BY MR. HORNER, IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, IN THE DEBATE ON THE REPORT OF THE BULLION COMMITTEE.

1. THAT the only money which can be legally tendered in Great Britain, for any sum above twelve-pence in the whole, is made either of gold or silver; and that the weight, standard, and denomination, at which any such money is authorized to pass current, is fixed, under his Majesty's prerogative, according to law.

2. That since the 43d year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, the indentures of his Majesty's miut have uniformly directed that all silver used for coin should consist of 110z. 2dwts. of fine silver, and 18dwts. of alloy in each pound troy, and that the said pound troy should be divided into 62 shillings, or into other coins in that proportion.

S. That since the 15th year of the reign of King Charles the Second, the indentures of his Majesty's mint have uniformly directed, that all gold used

for

for coin, should consist of 11oz. of pure gold and 10oz. of alloy in each pound troy; and that the said pound troy should be divided and coined into guineas and one half guinea, or into other coins in that proportion.

4. That by a proclamation of the 4th year of the reign of King George the First, it was ordered and directed, that guineas and the several other gold coins therein named, should be current at the rates and values then set upon them; viz. the guinea at the rate of 21 shillings, and other gold coins at the same proportion thereby establishing, that the gold and silver coins of the realm should be a legal tender in all money payments, and a standard measure for ascertaining the value of all contracts for the payment of money, in the reative proportion of 15- pounds weight of sterling silver to one pound

of sterling gold.

2859

13640

3. That by a statute of the 14th year of the reign of his present Majesty, sequently revived and made perpetual by a statute of the 39th year of his it is enacted, That no tender in payment of money made in the silver an of this realm, of any sum exceeding the sum of 251. at any one time, shall be reputed in law, or allowed to be legal tender, within Great Britain or Irefor more than according to its value by weight, after the rate of 5s. 2d. Mach ounce of silver.

That by a proclamation of the 16th year of the reign of his present MaJest carmed by several subsequent proclamations, it was ordered and Grected that if the weight of any guinea shall be less than 5dwts. 8grs. fach guinea shal! cease to be a legal tender for the payment of any money Great Britain or Ireland; and so in the same proportion for any other ald coin.

7. That under these laws, (which constitute the established policy of this real, in regard to money,) no contract or undertaking for the payment of ey, stipulated to be paid in pounds sterling, or in good and lawful money Great Britain, can be legally satisfied and discharged, in gold coin, unless the coin tendered shall weigh in the proportion of 20-21 parts of 5dwts. 8grs. standard gold for each pound sterling, specified in the said contract; nor in er coin, for a sum exceeding 251. unless such coin shall weigh in the proportion of 20-62 of a pound troy of standard silver for each pound sterling pecified in the contract.

& That the promissory notes of the Bank of England are stipulations to , on demand, the sum in pounds sterling, respectively specified in each of

the said notes.

9. That when it was enacted by the authority of Parliament, that the ent of the promissory notes of the Bank of England in cash should time be suspended, it was not the intention of Parliament that any teration whatsoever should take place in the value of such promissory

10. That it appears, that the actual value of the promissory notes of the Bank of England (measuring such value by weight of standard gold and silver as aforesaid) has been, for a considerable period of time, and still is, considerably less than what is established by the laws of the realm to be the legal teader in payment of any money contract or stipulation.

11. That the fall which has thus taken place in the value of the promissory notes of the Bank of England, and in that of the country bank paper which is exchangeable for it, has been occasioned by a too abundant issue of paper currency, both by the Bank of England, and by the country banks; and that this excess has originated from the want of that check and controul on the issues of the Bank of England, which existed before the suspension of cash payments.

12. That

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »