The Express.
London, England, 1850-06-20 00:00:00

the &fondest, who was SD yule of age, wee pinkly mar-
ri.d on the 271 k August, 1849, to a lady, named Mrs. Mary
Anne Vincent Vaughan, the widow of a Mr. Vincent
Vaughan. Anteriee to the marriage she was living sear her
grandmother, who wee 86 years Mese. After the marriage,
which wee solemnised at Paddington church, she continued
to live near her grandmother as before, passing still as Mrs.
Vaughan, the martins, for moms reason or other, being kept
• secret. Nut year, however, the parties were publicly
startled by Renee at Rt. New% lianoversquare. The
marrisee wee made pablie Is 6s Journals of nest mom
lag, fins which time Lady Reshape* was recognised
as the wife of his lenbhip. It also appeared
that when Lord Dashoyse agglied on both osmium
for the license, he represented hismeiif as a widower and Mrs.
Vaughan as • widow, and that the metriages were registered
in a similar manner. The which consisted of
several counts, charged the delimdant with wilfully making
a false statement for the puree of having it registered, the
false statement eon ' gof hie representation, when lag
applying for a licence, that he was a widower and Lady Dun-
bolus a widow at the thus when they were in reality man
sad wife.
Bit P. Kelly here interrupted the plaintiff's case by draw-
ing the attention of the court to the act, with a view to
showing that under It the present indictment could not be
sustained. The 44th motion of the Marriage Act :made that
act part sad parcel of the Registration Act. By a previous
section of the Marriage Act, it was provided that no indict-
ment could be enstaisted nadir it, which was not found
within three years after the contatimion of the offence. The
citiece is this case, if any, was committed in Dteember,
1843, whence. the indictment was not found until Cs years
afterwards, v: , in 1849.

Lord Campbeil, after coneiderable discussion on the point,
observed that he had great doubt that the indictment could
not stand, notwithstaading which he wen willing to with
draw the case from the jury.
The evidence having bees essehadied,
Mr. Cockburn addressed eleejsep kr the deface*, denying
tun.: teas Say atidaale 'SAM that the iffattensent
alleged to be false bad been main &bee wilfully oe tor.
ruptly. In the absence of such evidestm he contended that
the defendant should be acquitted.
Lord Campbe'l summed up the cue, and observed that it
wee for the jury to say whether the statement had been
made falsely and corruptly within the meaning
of the act. Before he could be found guilty
the jury must be satisfied that in what he did
the defendant had been actuated by sinister motives.
It such motives could not be brought home to him he could
clot be subjected to the penalties of the act. The false state-'I
meet with which the defendant stood charged was, that he I
was a widower, and Lady Henbane a widow, although
they were at the time man sad wife. If • second marriage
wu to take place at all, he was at • loss to know how it
could be otherwise registered, for the parties could not well
be described as Lord and Lady Duaboyae. The awe might
have been different had any bed motive existed, such as
the defrauding of any human being or injur-
ing any children who might have bees born.
The ea. of Lard Bides might grist the jury
in coming to a decision. He (Lord Eldon) had been mar-
ried in Scotland, and was afterwards married in England,
when he and his wife were described, not as Mr. and Mrs.
Scott, but as John Sera and Elisabeth !hetes. If the jury
were of opinion that Lord Dunboyne had wished, from •
good motive, to be married • mooed time, and had made
the statement in question, without any exceptionable or
corrupt motive, they would acquit him under the in-
dictment.

The jury, after t feet minutes ociandtation, returned a
verdict of ' Not Utility."

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—YarrEaray.
Nun Tams. EMIR Si a P. IN:nuac, C. 8., uu MLUDLTAILI

Comas JuksisT

Humraave c

Bliautpr.