The Express.
London, England, 1853-03-28 00:00:00

teem fur many months before the journey to Scotland,
when the marriage was represented to have taken place.
Ile oheuld show them that the only motive the defendant
had for going to Scotland was that he was deeply involved
in debt and difficulties, and had wriu out against hiss in
every county in England, and the lady in question *COM..
palsied him there as his concubine, but he had never the
sl;ghtest intention of making her his wife. lle pro-
' posed to put Lord fliantiogtower into the boa as
a witness. ll* was fully aware of his position, and
that he would have to admit the misconduct of his youth,
but he would make the avowal not only from a duty to
hint-elf in the position in which he was placed by this pro-
ceeding, but he would also do so betimes he felt it was due to
the lady whom he had made his wife, and by whom he
had children, t o state distinctly to the world that there was
no foundation for the claim set up by this woman to be his
wife; and that he had never before gone through the cere-
mony of ' ge either in Scotland, England, or any-
where else.

Lord Huntisgtowsr was then celled as a witnen—He
said, lam the defendant in this action. lam married, and
there is issue by the marriage. 1 was married is September.
18-51, is CathenneCantilla Elisabeth Burke, the daughter of
Sir Joseph Burke. I am now 32 rears old. lu 1843
my mother, Lady Dysart, lived at Bath, and 1 took a
cottage about two miles from Bath. I engaged Elisabeth
Acton! and her sister as my servants, the former as cook
and the latter as parlour-maid and hoommaid. They came
to live with me as my servants in December, 1813, and soon
afterwards an improper intercourse took place between me
and Elizabeth Acford. I left Bath in 1844, and went to the
Bridge-house Hotel in London. The reason I left that
neighbourhood was because I uaderstood that writs ef
execution against me were in the hands of the sheriff of
Somersetabire. I sent for Elisabeth Alford, and she joked
me in London, and we afterwards went together to a near
ber of different plasm I assumed the name of M'lsfsghten,
and she passed as my wife. I think it was in June, 1844,
that I went to Edinburgh. I went there to get out of the
way of the sheriffs' officers, and I did s• by the advice of
sly selicitor, to avoid being imprisoned for debt. I took a
Zdrnear Edinburgh, and I sent for Elizabeth Asford,
she came to me by the steam-boat, and we lived to.
getter in the cottage fur about three or four weeks. It
was my object to have a residence openly situated so that I
could see every one who approached, as I was a afraid of the
sheriffs' officers, and the outer gates were locked, and
I always kept the keys. Elisabeth Acfonl was not called
by any name while we lived at this cottage. I don't know
that the was called by any name, and certainly not by that
of Mrs. Tollemache. She aecempeoted me eine or twice
for • ...in •• • nooday, which was the only day I could go
out without fear of arrest. I never introduced her to any
one in Scotland as my wife, and I swear I was never mar•
ried to her in Scotland or anywhere else. All the time she
was with me I was in considerable difficultiee, and I believe
that by the letters I wrote to her I war the first to put it
ban her head to set up the claim to be Lady Hantingtower.
agem-eassained—l warnbo ia 1820, sad is 1842 I was a
bmdurept. In 1844 1 was issolireat. At the time I went
ffiesehed the 004111Milld00111, of taxes had a claim against
which I was aot released by nay bankruptcy. I
Im▪
il dee bemired a debt to Israel Alexander, and other
between my bankruptcy and my insolvency.
brriree that the Crown can issue writs out of England
info Scotland or Ireland. I menet say without looking
at my I...counts whether any other persons had obtained
trcots spinet me. Before I went to Scotland, Ells&
Aecferd had gone down to her friends iu Devonshire.
lble was after we had lived together in the way I have
Bribed. I don't recollect if I. wrote to her to join me
Beetland, but very probably I did. Before we went to
ffilledeed she went by my name and she did the tame after-
wftdet I went by the name of Tollemache in Scotland,
bet I ism% know what name she went by. My man ser-
mat knew that we were not married. She used to take
her meals at the same table with me, and the servants
called her " Ma'am." I have spoken of her as Mrs. Tel-
lemache, but never as my wife. The mama was, that she
was not my wife. I could n have obtained any re-
spectable apartments if she had not pawed as my wife.
The reason I left Scotland was, became I was informed
that at the snit of the Crown, a sheriff's officer was justi-
fied in breaking an outer door, and the moment I heard
of it I bolted, and spent all use miserable day on the
side of Holyrood Hill, and then Masted for England. I
remember burning letters on several occasions, and it is
very probable that on some occasions Elizabeth Asked
cried. On the day the sculls teak place in /Genuine's-
lane, I went to see her and observed her in the set ef pet-
ting two letters in her pocket, and as I reemmind the
haadwritimi of the address and knew from where they
came, I instated upon having them, and took the letters
away from her by force. I don't know thit I bast her
when I did so. The letters I took from her are is seers.
I wanted afterwards tops into her reosa to me if them was
any thing there belenrng to sas she prevailed me
from doing so. Up to the time of occurrence I allowed
her a sovereign • week, but since them I have not given her
any money. The statement with regard to the thousand
pounds is partially true; but what I really said was, that
if she hsA a thousand pomade she would, no doubt, be
able to annoy me a great dal-1 mean in the
way she is doing to-day I also said to her at
the same time, that although I was mmelf without
means, my family would assist me in repudiating the claim
she was setting up solely to extort money. There is att
doubt that all she wants is money. I have not given her
any since she set sip the claim to be my wife. I have Aland
to take the children and bring them up, and I Ma ready to
make an allowance to her as Elisabeth Acford, but not as
my wife. I swear I never told the witness Alfyatt that she
was my wife. lam not in the habit of talking to my ser-
vants. I am sure I never said ether that if I married
again I might be committed for bigamy. She malt be
mistaken. _ _ _

Mr. Bramwell—Did you sever say to her that as your fa-
ther was a Scotch peer, it would make the cerensony la
Scotland more binding ?
Lord Huntingtower—l never said anything of the sort.
It is a lie.
Cromesamination continued—l have so recollection of
saying that if the lady had her rights, else would have a
title too.
Mr. Bramwell—l Wier, you had a very strong feeling
for this lady ?
Lord liantinetower—Yes, I certainly had
Mr. Bramwell—Why did you give her up ?
Lord Huatingtower—ls this q•estioa relevant? Am I
obliged to answer it ?
Mr. Bramwell—Was it at your mother's, Lady Dysart's,
request that you gave her up -1
Lord Huntiagtower—l gave her up for several mamas.
I consider that our mane:ion really terminated is
January, 1848.

continued—l am now in the receipt of
andieessases from my family. It is not given to me upon
the semildes that I have no further amine:ion with this
woman. The allowance may be stepped at any moment.
tieduat Shoe said that was the dant's ease.
Mr. Bramwell replied.
Baron Alderson then summed up. He mid that ao learned
counsel se segybody else our asked foe ais unjust verdict,
bat be defiled very much whether in the present ease Mr.
Bramwell isis not doing that which he professed his base-
ball sal to de. The plaistiff had thought sit to trust a
waft who was living away hem • masa upon the sumo-
dein Oat he was her husband, sad if he bad really been
bee Waldhe was justided Is doing so, because the law
at Beaded allowed a wife to pledge IMO, husband's credit
ref souseades. What evidence, however, was there
say mules* bad taken passe, sad yet the present very
wises knee had tube. because the plaintiff had chosen to
gin medit to the remold without peeper inquiry. What
right bad be to set up • question whisk would go to bee
UAW tie children of that which was en undoubted mar-
riage, sad make 'Diaeresis and wretched the home of her
who dearly bad been married to the defendant in the
epos day, and in the preeencs of her family and friends ?
Whatever might be said by the weasel for the plaintiff,
there could be no doubt that it was impossible for the jury
to find a verdict for hini without at the same time declaring
their belief that a previous marriage had taken place in
Scotland ; sad what they considered the vary serious
consequences of coming to such • decision he wu sure
they would not so decide unless the evidence was
most clear and conclusive. If there was even any
doubt upon the subject, he was sure, on so very
serious a case, they would not jump to the conclusion
that a marriage had taken place, but that they would give
the defendant the benefit of that doubt. If the question
had been one of a marriage in England he should have
stopped the case hours before' bat in Scotland, and he
could not help looking upon it as • disgrace to the law of
that country, almost any proceeding amounted to a cos-
triter of marriage. The parties might almost cure over a
broonisEck, or if the man said be took tie woman for ei
wife, and she said she took him foe • husband, it Shea sat&
dent, and hence the difficulty in the present case
and they were called upon to say whither a cum:74
some kind or other, amounting to a marriage, had not
taken place between the parties. If such a miserable con-
tract of marriage, however, ins set up, surely there ought
to be some evidence of what did really take plus at the
time, and the hearsay statements of persons made several
years afterwards ought not to be taken as proof
of such a marriage having taken place. Surely
each evidence as this would not be sufficient
for reasonable men, particularly when the very se-
rious oensequenoes that must result from an adverse deal-
. slots were taken into consideration. There was also this

fact, which appeared to him to beery Important. If
marriage of any kind did really take Ora, the woman in
question mum be well aware of all the circumstances, and
the precise time when it weaned, end yet not a single
question had been 'eked upon the subject. The learned
Judge proceeded to say. that the jury were not required to
decide that no marriage did take place, but it would be
sufficient for them to say that the evidence at present be-
fore them did not make out the fact of the marriage, and
in that ground the plaintiff had failed to prove his ease.
The jury here interpseed, and said this we the view
they took of the matter. They did sot desire to give any
opinion with regard to the fact whether the marriage in
Scotland did take place or sot, but they were of opinion
that the evidence now before them did not establish the
marriage to their satisfaction.
Mr. Baron Alderson said the jury bad come to a very
proper conclusion, and, upon that finding, the present ver-
dict would be for the defendant.

Tim cue concluded the business on the Hose Circuit.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.
s.ass Ma. hems Mtwara
PIRJU&T AT ♦ COUNTY COUNT.
• OWINII. aged 21, a esaael weaver, was indicted for
basin's' dm 18th day of Mareb,lB63, been guilty otwil-
fdrimpe7aryiathe *video:co which ha gavel's a
witness Is a sass fa whish,be himself was plaintiff.
The jury hued tM prisoarr oatihhr, but seesaw:sada
his se gamy "• mina of *amass of what be was

IT. MARCH 24.