The Sun.
London, England, 1831-02-28 00:00:00

lA* _
INTELLIGENCE.•=I-(THIS DAY).
• ..
1%.„- 110 USE OF L ORD S.
',louse sat on Scotch Appeals to-day. The Peers
bti7tismee were the LORD CHANCELLOR, the Earl of
and Lord DE DUNSTANYILLE.
11ICUARD BEMPDE JOHNSTON HONYMAN, BART., V.
aura
ELIZABETH CAMPBELL, LADY HONYMAN, AND
tk_44RETH AND ALEXA HONYMAN.
appellant in this appeal is the eldest son of the late
Honyman, Bart., who, under the title of Lord
ej :d.ale, was formerly one of the Senators of the College
ftee; and the respondents are a lady, who had
t°rly a governess in the family of the father of
appellant, and two children, which she had by
hiPPellant: and the principal question in the ap-
,wes, whether under all the circumstances which
Rip '
anlea place, the appellant and respondent were
eiti d wife. The facts of the case were these. In the
IN:Part of the summer of 1808, the respondent, who
atily t,tbn 22 years of age, went as a governess to the fa-
sf ;i;`tne appellant's f ether, where she remained upwards
dirt; Year% After she had been in her situation about
it thlers, the appellant came home from India ; he was
of hs, 2• time
t, a, years of age, and in a very delicate crate
hetweLl"; shortly afterwards an attachment commenced
tia,C° the appellant and the respondent, which
star, ueed up to the year 1813, when he made her
to Marriage, but the respondent, considering that a
r%rn_tlie betwixt them would not be agreeable to the pa-
t, bruf the appellant, endeavoured to dissuade him from
'lel however, persevered in his professions of love
MtetnPosal of marriage, and requested that she would
447 ()f him as her husband, and that their marriage
ok 0 ne kept private for a alma time; and particularly
Itattke,l . iktan'°M on the 20th of June, 1813, the appel-
-1443, le into the respondent's bed room, in his father's
sate nt Stnyllum Park, when he earnestly solicited and
thh!_ted the complainant to consent to take him as her
111,n, c!: declaring that on the first opportunity which
his., of leaving Smyllutn he would legally make tier
Wife,
• •
Sea The respondent resisted these entreaties,
toallnti the appellant asking her why she would not
Spo4-4,t, to his wishes, observing that she might depend
RIAt 'us honour, and that no one could possibly know
4147:4 Passed between them, the respondent replied,
e l
ta "eve I may depend upon your honour, but were
ette eYe shut, every ear closed, and every tongue still--
% and dearly as I love you—l should know the eii-
tae h,ttan ee myself, and that would be sufficient to make
tseaCserable." The appellant continued to beg and en-
Nib of
hereth respondent to consent to his wishes, as-
her hg that he was totally incapable of injuring
his b.e:nour or his own, and begged her to become
heet:tre, to which she replied that she never would
her to to become his wife, and to him every affection of
the "estt had long been dedicated, but called on hint at
te lute time to recollect that by marrying her he might
0101,,ki,ng a sacrifice in the eyes of his relatives seeing
esP.,n not offer him any fortune, and that however re-
SoCe,stable her connections were, his parents might
tleit'°usider them sufficiently so to qualify her for
he woee,n's wife. To which the appellant answered
of h• Ind consult his own happiness and not that
ifh ni relations and he then asked the respondent
trite might call her his wife, to which she assented, and
toe aekllant then said to her, do then my beloved wife let
(I ear You call husband, to which she replied dearest
tearest jj•
leky you are my husband, and havina thus mu-
Pell,‘„,aecePted of each other as husband and wife, the ap-
e, said, you are now mine for ever, Betsy, and
Iroti7 wife you must share whatever 1 have in the
IStlf You linow I I aye just 200/. a-year, and the
laktof it must be yours. This was the only ceremony of
der that had taken place between the pith s, who
,itrards lived privately together, and had two children
t° of the respondents. During the winter succeed-
klinte mart iage the respondent resided with her aunt in
the ),rgh, where the appellant visited her. Afterwards
4rurned to Surrey from the seat of the appellant's fa-
' 414 Where she was delivered of one of the respondents,
kith' order to prevent any trace of any thing which
Ate, "Pose the appellant to ihe displeastire of Ilia E-
lk, she left Smyllum within 36 hoar! after the chill was
14LS/4 obtained shelter for it and herself in the house
tatheih4anger at Leith. Afterwards she went to a friend
‘St -:rerarY, where she received letters -from the appel-
k,
.ituaiously desiring a meeting to arrange their future
IN:, but, owing to an accident which befel him. on the
Set,pilte did not accomplish his visit On returning from
ssek—hrY in 1815, the respondent went again to Edin-
Stii' Where the appellant cohabited, though with se-
latit;4‘ his wife, and paid all the debts which she had
,esafi,""• The respondent being now near her second
'sitee den The
in order to avoid discovery, was obliged to
esttiumee aunt's, and go to York, where the second
Lastea„. r,sts'as born, and in consequence of the slender in-
sts Richard, the respondent supported herself and
41111s11:411.eu by her own industry. The affections of the
tatti
nn nt now became cool, and in 1821 he dis-
Sited his visits, the respondent was thrown into gaol for
lases 1:4 Was obliged to contract, being determined to
'go epeet; Marriage a secret, knowing that to have brought
er‘S'e teen upon the appellant as her husband, would
Lte..t4 Complete destruction to all her ultimate hopes
34t,10n with him. She, however, wrote some affect-
to him, telling him she was dying, his children
Vold entreating him to have some pity on his
-74f,4 ,° Which the appellant replied, that it was her
kll,:cit) asking her why she did not see the gentleman
at% f undertaken on his part to make arrange-
iti4 °r the children, sending 51., an I stating
take should not send any more till a settlement
frie:d?no?• Several negociationsh took place between
e t each patty, whic vere put an end to by
octant bringing an action in the Court of Coin-
Entlinburgh, who found in favour of the marriage.
4o : :
fn irtnnt was brought before the Court of Session,
ioe„ tiir ined the judgment below, and from that de-
e Present appeal was brought.
ustirecTost appeared for the appellant, and was
ing the House when our reporter left.

•
CURT OF KING'S BENCH.
ANs V. COX AND OTHERS.
" an action brought by the plaintiff to recover
f'tieenf..444ots, who are directors of the British Life A—
ti laseras'uice, the sum of 2,5001. the amount of a policyil
nee effected on the life of a lady named Dou e-
The
the Payment of the insurance was resisted by the
. AN. e ground (as was alleged) that the lady
.wh.om
L'atile in accelerated her death by excessive drinking
S-Mint PPirite• As the case is likely to occupy the Court
ott:le of the day, we refrain from publishing a detailed
11 en
?„._
la -ue "T OF COMMON PLEAS.
fl 4 h—u." Was occupied the principal part of the morn-
ettrin
bfit 114, gan action to recover compensation in damagesi
aesault. The plaintiff and defendant are pans
thargiail Alile-end, and this quarrel arose at one of the
kieetingL The case was not of the least intereit,
Th•°ettiet
is 0. all not returned when our reporter left.
.1° last day of the Court sitting before Easter
TO
41e1lARD HART DAVIS, ESQ. M.P.
'44
sajit,
dren thus puc, my apology is,
treielltioat yOadu harssig Y
og e "fatedu
in the House of Commons on
it 4:lllee7e Petition from Bristol is not correct.
tieat rePeittd by The Sun newspaper to say, thatlso
d upo Public fleeting where the resolutions were a
lUeetilib' You must or ought to have known,. that.
ita:°lalate,Alwas held at the WHIFF: LION INN, which is
4' bar the head-quarters of the Torie., and without
totiNikt. Y u
. N also state that the petition is against
s 4-`m tk r I must tell you, that the porters whoat;
1041 NI, Guildhall told those who signed it, THAT l
I I)l:therw:°434. This was stated to many hundreds
Ott taf " would not have affixed their signatures.
shophat th 'in:nation and letters in my possession, stating
country villa s many miles round Bristol, the
ave-„44 signed for quitee a different purpose from what
Yott":represented it to have been to Parliament.
wereale, Apt not aware of this circumstance, I can be-
-74 the
.._YO 11
bvv ill soon know that Bristol is for Reform
ralq te Y ballot.
oae of your unwilling constituents,
JOHN WESLEY HALL.
..tOth '4lll. 116--
ht, 'ILLU'ORNI MEET I NG.--011 Wed-
mell,,Ter t' the freemen and freeholders of the city of
toe °I the Guildhall, to petition for Reform in
Tlptilianlert The Mayor presided, and a petition, praying
Ms. the Reform generally, was proposed by Mr.
atileastx ue barrister, which having been seconded, a
Prot,

11;4 'Sc' b opose. a petition, prayingof course it fell to
Isi,.kttilm.Qt no one seconded it, and . .
1 for universal
't ''',l;, for' L An amendment to the original petition,t
tit'hc the
Cote by ballot, was then moved by di,
,ti (1.,
‘'ll Fo ' aild after some warm opposition to it the pe-
4t' eq,44.rieaded was carried almost unanimously. It
l 4(4 uto lie for signatures at the Guildhall .11
411.t4 I)%ligilt, and then to le forwarded for presentation
I i frt. be °f SOMERSET to the Lords, and the Mem-
l's,(4ll,l, ter, to the Commons. In the mean while
I,tt4ty, Peettrition
was drawn up and placed at the public
L4O Aria neltlY beseeching the Legislature "to Teje.c
,t,o P 0341 for the exercise of the elective franchise by