The Express.
London, England, 1860-11-28 00:00:00

COURT FOR DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL

CAUSES.—Nov. 27.

(Before the Judge Ordthery, Kr. Julies Wietbsia, said
lb• Justice Williams.)

TEI BMW= --JUDGIIOrf.
Mr. Collier, Q.C. having concluded his repky, the court,
after a few minuted adjournment, proceeded at onoe to pro-
nounce lintence upon the questions which had been sub
mitted to it.

---iiii7JMdge Ordinary said they had now arrived at the
last stage of this very singular inquiry, an inquiry
the length sad complexity of which had caused
the mart to feel is a very considerable dspee
the respendbiliey that rented upon them. Tbara
were two or three circumstances, however, which somewhat
diminished that feeling. In the first place the oedema had
been given somewhat slowly, and so much immaterial
matter bed bees mixed up with whet was material that
they bad bad abundant timo to consider the weight that
should be assigned to the latter. Another circumstance
that might have embarrassed them was the fact that the
female petitioner bad been left for • considerable time to
conduct the mum without the aseistanoe Preowned ; but the
intimate knowledge which she had displayed with every
fact, material or immaterial, connected with the history of
lb. family, sad the singular tact sad dexterity whirl she
I had shown in the management of her ease, entirely
relieved the court from may appreheesion es that some.
Besides, a portion of the evidence had bees gives, and the
whole had been very ably commented upon by en experi-
enced counsel. Lastly, the court felt that the case was not
• question depending upon nicely behead evidence, but it
was use upon which they had all been sodded to come to •
most clear and unhesitating judgment. The questas was
simply this :—Had • marriage in fact been solemnized,
whether with or without religious rites, between the father
and the mother of the elder petitioner beforo be was
born? During fourteen days the court had bad to
discharge the functions of juryman; but they could
not content themselves with giving, like jurymen, •
simple verdict of aye or no—they felt booed to state
the reasons from which they drew the conclusions to
which they had come. The facts on which the case turned
were not uumerous. The evidence given by the petitioners
of the alleged marriage was confined to what woe celled
habit and repute ; but they said that at this distance of
time it would not be reasonable to expect them to supply
better testimony. of the fact. Now the first question that
suggested itself in dealing with the case was, why should
the marriage have been • secret one? The only reams
they had now attempted to rugged sou that Mr. Wilson,
the father of the bride, objected to the match became the
difference between her age and the age of Mr. Shedden was
too great ; and then it was said that immediately after this
secret marriage the parties cohabited together as man and
wife, down to the death of the petitioner's father; that in
.titizentisiteeverybody knew of ; and that Mrs. Shedder
awl was visited by the ladies of New York. But
1111•1 a AMISS reason to give for keeping a marriage meat!
If Mr. Wilson objected to his daughter being married to
Mr. redden became he was too old, would he be reconciled
to the idea of her cohabiting with him without being mar-
ried, so far se ho knew, at all? But, again, was this the
mean the petitioner had always given' In 1633 he was in
treaty with Mr. Patrick for the purchase of the Rooghwood
estate, and in a letter of the 14th of June he
" Though I am unable to establish my right just no:7A
what is known on the subject would not be in your favour.
I conceive it my duty to inform you that my sister told me
that my mother was a respectable young perms, living with
her parents on a small farm on my father's estate, and that
he did not publicly acknowledge her on account of her hum-
ble birth, but that he nevertheless treated by ae his wife."
U that was so, what became of the raison now alleged for
the massy of the match ? This. by the way, was the letter
of • man who stated that till 1848 or 1849 he had never had
the slightest intimation that any marriage had taken place
until the ceremony which wasperfornsed on his father's
death bed ! But this wee not. aIL Be went on to say
"Moreover my sister told me in 1888, when she mentioned
this circumstance to one,. that • wenn was still living who
was tat the private we
After these two
opposite reams assigned for the secret marriage, what con-
fidence could be felt is the evidence of habit ad rete ?
Against that evidence there was thetestintouyel 1111 a
who declared that Mr. Madden always pried for • eh*
man, and who was of much greeter age them these witnesses
who had been examined on the other aide. Theo was like-
wise the evidence of John Barr, which, if Barr had not
perjured himself, was exceedingly strong. If the ease had
stopped here ho (the leansed judge) might, perhaps, have
felt some athenaeum:it, though he believed he should even
then have held that the petitioners had Pot adduced suffi-
cient affirmative evidence to warrant his fornung a judicial
opinion that a marriage had taken place previous to
1798. With regard to the death-bind marriage on
the 7th of November in that year. what reason
could be usigned for &thief that Meg ? It could not, on
the hypothesis of the petitioners. have bees taken in order
to make reparation for any wrong done to Anne Wilma ;
neither could it have been prompted by a religious scruple
as to the lawfulness of matrimonial cohabitation without the
sanction of the church, because Mr. Shedden well koew that
his cohabitation with the mother of the petitioner would
never again be resumed. What other cause was there? It
was suggested that the deceased might have thought that a
second marriage might have been easier of proof than the
first. But that could hardly be. All New York, it was
said, knew of the first marriage ; and Mrs. tThedden visited
and was visited by the families of Dr. Boswell,
Mrs. Rankin, Mr. Hamilton, Judge Peodleton, and
the other persona of repute of whose acquaint-
sace the pajama= boasted. The deceased might
moreover have made • declaration which would have bees
conclusive. The only other motive for the marriage was
the Ida" that it would legitimate the children whom the
parties bad bad out of wealluck ; and that, No long as it
suited Ids came, was the mason assigned by the petitioner
himself. He bed been continually pressing upon his
undo the fact that his father bad always intended
him to have the Bonghwood property, and that he
(Mr. Patrick) bad basely availed himself of a tech-
nical objection to defeat the intention of the
decried. It had been , indeed, that, Mr. itheddee
had by some means been to mimed that there would be
a conspiracy to deny his former marriage ; sad that to
make sure he hod had the marriage re-solemnised with
ecclesiastical forms. If there really bad been such • design,
who could have been parties to the y ? Clearly no
one but Mr. John Patrick in New Y and Mr. Wra. or
Mr. Robert Patrick in Scotland. But was it possible to
conceive, if Mr. Shedden had any such idea, that he would