The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-29 00:00:00

SINGULAR PLEA.

The following curious case came, last week, before
the Court of Assizes at Beauvais. M. d'Amour, a native
of Paris, long known as being in the habit of teach-
ing at schools in the vicinity, in October, 1836, went
to Noyon with his wire, for the purpose of purchasing
the geodwill of a ladies' school there, and of s .ttlilig
themselves in that place. It is requisite in France that
schoolmasters and schoolmistresses should pros ide them-
selves with certificates of competency to instruct (a
good custom, which it would nut be amiss to transfer
from France to England), and Madame d'Amour found
it necessary to obtain one ; but being conscious of
11.7 r want of capaeii y, she was nfraid to present her-
self before the Board of Ex ;miners, and consequently in-
duced her husband to dress in female attire and appear as
Madame d'Amour, which he did on the 3d of last March.
Tire Board of Examiners did not see through the imposi-
tion. They received Madame d'Amour with true Univer-
sity courtesy, and Madame went through the ordeal in so
brilliant a manner, that as an act of justice as well as cour-
tesy, the Board of Examiners passed a special resolution
for making honourable mention of her unusual proficiency
in the report of their proceedings. The certificate, more-
over, which was granted on the score of so triumph ant an
examination, produced immediately after, from the Academy
of Amiens, the presentation of a brevet de capacite of the
first degree—only granted to the most eminent in the scho-
lastic profession. But luck too often creates; presurnp-
fon. D'Amour had the imprudence to write and sign a
letter of acknowledgment in the name of his wife. The
neatness and firmness of the characters caused suspicion as
to the authorship. Madame D'Amour was politely re-
quested by the Board to copy her letter, and it was then
made sufficiently manifest by the comparison of the
writing, that the first letter had not been written by
hcr. Mr. D'Amour was in consequence indicted before
the Assizes of Beauvais, on a charge of fraud. M.
D'Amour, upon being called upon to explain the transac-
tion, without hesitation, took upon himself to defend
it. This defence was remarkable. He confessed every
thing ; but he maintained that be and his wife being one
person, he had the legal right to act both for end as his wife
if he pleased. "To have been rejected," said he, " would
have been the ruin of both of us. I felt persuaded of a bad
result if she attempted an examination. On the contrary, I
was certain of success if I underwent it myself. I consi-
dered it a matter of life and death to act as I did ; and more-
over I had legal warrant for it in the ecclesiastical canon,
that a man and his wife are one and the same person." A
short investigation followed on the part of the Bench and
the Jury as to the moral character and reputation of the
accused, which proved to be entirely in their favour. M.
Dupont, the Procureur du Roi, opened the proceedings on
behalf of the prosecution ; and then the counsel for the de-
fendant, M. Leroux, addressed the Court for the defence,
in which he developed the singular plea of matrimonial
unity maintained by his client with so much adroiteess,
and urged the mitigating circumstances with so much ability
that the defence was completely triumphant, and the Jury
unanimously acquitted the prisoner, amidst the acclama-
tions of the audience.