The Sun.
London, England, 1862-12-20 00:00:00

711 E YELVER7ON CASE.

•-
The following appeared in a Fourth Edition of The Sun °

last evening -
EDINBURGH, FRIDAY EVENING''
COURT OF SESSION—FIRST DIVISION.
The intense interest manifested during the eased
of this extraordinary trial seemed to have increa.se
to the highest pitch, in consequence of its )I°l
become generally known that their lordships s67°'-do
deliver their decis:on in this case to-day. Cre
of persons outside the Parliament House who
not been successful in obtaining admission w`"
trying every means in their power to gain entrance;
but the dimensions of the Court, even had a tithe
those anxious to be present been admitted, w°lll
have been found totally inadequate for their acorn-
modation. So great was the pressure that elehn
those engaged in the case had a difficulty in reac''
ing their proper places. rd
The judges were the Lord President, ••--°
Curriehill, and Lord Deas. the
It will be recollected that the case was, io
month of July last., before Lord Ardmi.llar, svl,,°':t
0
the conclusion of the arguments, pronouneeuple
decision rdverse to the Hon. Mrs. Yelve.rton ("
Longworth). The learned judge was of oPivi:r.
that no marriage had been established by We P;,..
suer (Mrs. Yelverton) according to any of the
gular modes recognised by the law of Scotland.
The decision was appealed against, and
carried by reclaiming petition before the •r-(1
Division of the Court of Session, and was °l.gue
at length during the early part of last month.
.
erf
The Counsel for the pursuer (Mrs. Yet to
were the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor-Genertl
(since raised to the bench) • Major Yelverton
°
repres..t.d. by Mr. Gordon: Mr. young
The 0
Sootor-General ), an ivn.1.111.._
statement of the pursuer ..
on that ocessi°l;
was that the engagement to marry was first entered
into at Galata, iu September, 1855 ; was retie i°.
in the Ctirnea in March, 1856; again reneweu„.o
Edinburgh in the spring of 1857 ; that the Par .;c1
were married at Rosstrevor in August, 1857, eLt
again came to Scotland, where they lived with eLo
other for some time as husband and wife. It
not till after the Irish cereti_lony that intereoll• r,
took place, and the pursuer consented that the
riage should be kept a secret from the defenhuetiis
family, owing to his pecuniary relations Nv't7 bed
uncle, who had lent him money, and Ng" 1; be
him not to marry- The marriage, howeierrs'ueio
acknowledged by the defender to the 1311„,—
and
d thefriends, who consented to keep it secret,
parties travelled together in the Highlano
elsewhere as husband and wife. to
The defender, on the other hand, said no'
never was any engagement, promise, or contenota
tion of marriage on his part, that he entere'l
the Irish marriage as a device to satisfy the
conscience, and that he had had intercourse "tile
her during the first Edinburgh visit and durirg ot
three weeks that elapsed after their nieetajttei
Waterford and marriage at Rosstrevor, vale°
lived in different hotels together. reser/f
In the form in which the case was at P-A,cide
raised the questions the Court was asked to b,"-fiage
were two—first, whether there was an intero`h
of mutual consent to marry proved by writt,ell or
clarations or verbal acknowledgments of toeroise
fender; and, second whether there was
of marriage followed by intercourse in ffiloity
that promise. The pursuer maintained the af,"ool'
tive. The defender the negative of these Pll4
tions. oa,
The marriage ceremony at Rosstrevor, in Irepeife
was not insisted on by the pursuer ass 6P'evt'
ground in the present case, there being 'llisiero
dente the opinions of Irish constitutional la tote
to the effect that that ceremony dlr.' not ceps on
marriage, but the point was express2Y keP,teotit°
in order to be raised anew should
come before the House of Lords, id, ot
versed in Irish as well as Scotch law, v"°,tie an
course, set aside legal opinions as evident' ',ace,
form their own judgment on the cause. Itefertirol
however, was made by the pursuer to 016 -oi
ceremony, as throwing light both on the •e to
interchange of consent and the alleged prono
mar
The ry. „t
excitement in Court at the Moree;poget
Judges took their seats on the bench was
in consequence of it having been reported that of
of them were in favour of reversing the deeis'°-

the Lord Ordinary. gee
Lords Peas and Curriehill first addressed „coo
Ceurt, and were of opinion that the marriage,,i'lo
valid, and that the decision of Lord Ardol
ought to be reversed. peel'
The Lord President, after an elaborate 011001
expressed his opinion that the decision of
Ardmillan ought not to be reversed. otell
Majority in favour of the validity of the
marriage—ONE. Yelp
b
:Bo
_
Immediately the decision in favour of Niro
verton was pronounced, the spectators in courrbeer
vent to their feelings by loud and continuo' s for,
ing, which all the authority of the Court 813 of
some time unable to suppress. On the re', the
the trial becoming known outside the count
same demonstrations of approval took Place.