The Sun.
London, England, 1861-12-16 00:00:00

THE TELVERTON CASE.

The proof for Major Yelverton in the Scotch mar-
riage case was resumed at Edinburgh, before Lord
Ardmillan, on Friday. Mr. J. F. Drummond, Haw-
thornden ; Capt. Wrottesley, Staffordshire Militia ;
and Mr. John Blackwood, publisher, Edinburgh,
were called to prove that while stationed in Edin-
burgh Castle and Leith Fort in 1858 Major Yelver-
ton passed both in society and among the officers as
a married man. Mr. J. T, Atkinson, deputy-con-
troller of the General Post-office, Edinburgh, was
shown the envelope of a letter in process addressed
"Rev. Mr. Moonie, Rostrevor, Ireland," and de-
poned that it had reached the General Post-office,
Edinburgh, from the sub-office at which it was posted
on the evening of the 13th of June, 1858. He was
also:shown, for verification of the post-marks, an
envelope bearing the same address, posted at Hull
the 10th of June, 1858, and another addressed " Vis-
count Avonmorc, Donnybrook-road, near Newry,
Ireland," posted at Boulogne on the 20th of June.
No further evidence was offered at this stage.
The Lord Ordinary having, on the 7th instant,
granted a commission, at the instance of counsel for
defender, to take the evidence of lawyers in Dublin
upon the subject of the Irish marriage law, Mr.
Crichton, the Commissioner, sat at the Four Courts,
Dublin, on Wednesday last for the purpose, and the
evidence taken has since been published. The first
witness called was Mr. George Battersby, LL.D.,
Q.C., who, in answer to the first question, stated
that the marriage of Protestants with Roman Ca-
tholics in Ireland is regulated by the statute 19th
George 11., cap. 13, which annuls all marriages
celebrated by a Popish priest between Protestant
and Protestant or Protestant and Papist, declaring
such marriages to be " null and void to all intents
and purposes, without any process, judgment, or
sentence of law whatsoever." There is no
other statute, he stated, affecting the vali-
dity of such a marriage, and the statute is now
in full force, and has been so treated by decisions
of the Courts both-in England and Ireland. The
following are the principal questions put to
witness as to the application of the statute to
the present case, and his answers thereto :—Assum-
ing a ceremony of marriage to have been performed
in Ireland at any time in the year 1857 by a
Roman Catholic priest, between a male and female,
both of full age of 21 years, one of such persons
being then, and for several years previously, a
Roman Catholic, and the other of such persons
either then being, or having within twelve months
previously professed himself or herself to be a Pro-
testant, would such a marriage be valid by the law
of Ireland, ? Clearly not.
• . •

Assuming that one of the parties married by a
Roman Catholic priest, though in fact a Protestant,
or though he had within twelve months previous to
the ceremony professed himself to be a Protestant,
did at the time of the ceremony make a represen-
tation that lie or she was a Roman Catholic, and
that the ceremony of marriage was performed by
the priest on the faith of that representation, would
such party by the law of Ireland be estoppel or
invalidity or nullity of such
marriage, assuming that otherwise the marriage
justiceb barred
a g from,e t pleading or proving in a court of
would, by virtue of the statute to which you
have already referred, be invalid ?--In a matri-
monial cause in which the validity or invalidity of
such a marriage was the question at issue, such
party would not by the law of Ireland be estopped
or barred from pleading or proving the invalidity or
nullity of such marrige.
With reference to the statute 19th George 11., c.
13, sec. 1., will you state by what acts or deeds is a
profession of Protestantism evidenced or ascertained?
—The profession of Protestantism, to bring a case
within the Act, should be evidenced by acts une-
quivocal, such as receivingthe sacrament or attend-
ing the religious rites of the Protestant Church, or
performing acts of religious duty which a Roman
Catholic would not do.

If a party were originally educated and brought
up as a Protestant, and had continued to a mature
period of life unquestionably a Protestant, would
not less evidence suffice to prove him a Protestant,
within the meaning of that statute, than would be
necessary if, being originally educated as a Roman
Catholic, and continuing a Roman Catholic to a ma-
ture period of life, his conversion to Protestantism
were asserted ?—ln the case of a party
originally educated and brought up a Protestant,
and continuing so to a mature period of life prime
facie he must be considered as still a Protestant,
and the onus of .proving him a Roman Catholic
would lie upon the party alleging he was such
Roman Catholic. In the case of a man originally
educated a Roman Catholic, and continuing a Roman
Catholic to a mature period of life, prima facie ho
would still continue a Roman Catholic, and the onus
of proving him to be a professing Protestant would
lie on the party alleging him to be such ; and the
fact should be evidenced by acts unequivocal, such
as receiving the sacrament or attending religions
rites of the Protestant Church, or performing acts of
religious duty which a Roman Catholic would not do.
Examined for the plaintiff—lf a man about to
go through the ceremony of marriage with a
Roman Catholic declared at the time that he
was a Roman Catholic, and thereby induced a
Roman Catholic priest to marry him according to
the rites of the Church of Rome, do you not con-
sider that such a declaration would be strong evi-
dence that the party making it was then a Roman
Catholic?—lt would bo evidence, but whether
strong or not would depend upon the accompan3 ing
circumstances—as, for instance, in the case of
" Gibbons v. Gibbons," where the party to he mar-
ried went to a priest who was not his parish priest,
and on being asked if he were a Catholic answered
that he was a bad Catholic, and thereupon, he
being a Protestant in truth, was married to a
Roman Catholic, such a declaration in my opinion
was not strong evidence, but the weakest possible