The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-28 00:00:00

THITREiDAYI EVENING,

King Ferdinand 11. could be said to have spent so I
much money in the improvement of his darling
stronghold of Gaels. He built, it is true, a large,
staring Gothic church on the summit of the town,
which escaped almost unscathed from the severe
ordeal of the siege; but that pious monarch reckoned
too much on the protection of the holy building, if
he thought it would cover the multitude of his ini-
quities, and screen him or his dynasty from the
retribution which outraged humanity prepared to
wreak upon them.
General Cialdini and his officers are preparing for
a general move to reduce the citadel of Messina,
where old General Fergola, at the head of 4,000
men of the garrison, refuses to surrender, steady in
his purpose not to resign the command of the place
except into the hands or by an express order of the
King, by whom he was trusted with it. King
Francis wrote to Pergola, it is said, but enjoining
further resistance. The strength of the citadel,
however, commanded as it is by the forts on the
hills, lies entirely in the power it has of laying the
town of Messina in ashes. It is well known that
it was by the terror with which he inspired the in-
habitants that Fergola has succeeded hitherto not
only in warding off an attack, but in supplying
himself with provisions by the " voluntary' con-
tributions of the city.

THE YELVERTON MARRIAGE CASE.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DUBLIN, FEB. 26.

THELWALL V. YELVERTON-FIFTH DAY.

As on the previous days of the hearing of this
most interesting and important case the excitement
that prevailed and the anxiety to obtain admission
to the court were intense. Long before the open-
ing of the court a considerable number of ladies and
gentlemen were admitted by the private entrance to
the gallery, and when the doors were thrown open
a tremendous rush ensued, and the court in every
part, and the approaches thereto, became speedily
crowded, and not so much as standing room could
be procured within earshot of the bench and bar.
At half-past ten o'clock the jury having been
called and answered to their names, and the Chief
Justice having taken his seat on the bench,
The Rev. Dr. O'Connell, P.P., Irishtown, was
sworn and examined by Mr. Whiteside—l was in
court yesterday when the Rev. Mr. Mooney was
examined, and the marriage stated by him was a
perfectly valid marriage according to the rites of
the Church of Rome.

Mr. Sergeant Armstrong objected to the evidence.
Mr. Waldron Borroughs, J.P., examined by Mr.
Whiteside—l know the Rev. Mr. Mooney. I belong
to his congregation, but not particularly to his
Church. I know the church at Rostrevor. I have
had a conversation with the Rev. Mr. Mooney
about this marriage. This was at his own house
at dinner, a little preceding dinner-time, in March,
1859. I began to banter the Rev. Mr. Mooney
as to the scrape he had got into about this
marriage. He intimated to me, in a very signifi-
cant manner, that he had made them man and wife.
He said he had incurred no ecclesiastical censure.
To take a rise out of him, and at his particular in-
stance, I told him what was the law on the subject
of marrying a Protestant and a Catholic. He feared
that he would be transported. (Laughter.)
H. H. Lancaster, Esq.—l am a member of the
bar of Scotland ; have studied the law of Scotland
as to marriage ; consent only is necessary ; no form
is required; no ceremony; no public notice; no
cohabitation; not even witnesses; perfect matri-
monial consent may be interchanged without the
presence of any third party.
Is there any particular way by the law of Scot-
land by which this may be proved ?—No ; it may
be proved by subsequent acknowledgments, written
or verbal, or by oath ; or, in fact, by any evidence
that can prove the fact.
If a man consents to take a woman for his wife,
and that woman consents to take a man for her
husband, and that is proved, is that a marriage by
the law of Scotland ?—Yes ; cohabitation is not
required to strengthen the consent of marriage.
Is a subsequent acknowledgment of a prior con-
sent in Scotland an acknowledgment of the mar•
riage ?—Yes, unquestionably. A course of letters
or conduct avowing the relationship of husband and
wife would be a presumptior, that the consent must
have passed between the parties.
Cross-examined by Dr. Ball—There are three
modes of constituting an irregular marriage in
Scotland—first; habit and repute; secondly, pro-
mise followed by copula ; third, acknowledgment,
per verbide presenti ; consent, without a third party
being present, constitutes a marriage.
In reply to Dr. Ball, the witness said that he had
been brought in as counsel in the case of Mrs. Yel-
verton in Scotland, to take the place of a learned
brother who had fallen ill. He had been called to
the bar about three years,
Sergeant Sullivan submitted some documentary
evidence in reference to Mr. Yelverton's passage on
board the Great Briton steamer from Malta to
Southampton, from the 24th of March to the sth of
April, 1855.
Sergeant Sullivan here read a translation of
Father Mooney's certificate of marriage, in the
chapel of Kilbroney, in the diocese of Dromore, in
1857. He also read a letter from Rev. Bernard
Mooney enclosing Mrs. Yelverton's certificate of
marriage, in which be congratulated her on the
prospect of the birth of a child.
The following is the Rev. Mr. Mooney's letter :
" Rostrevor, Jan. 15, 1858.

" Dear Madame,—l had great pleasure in receiv-
ing your long-expected letter, communicating the
good news of the expected arrival of a young
stranger. You exactly state ;the truth when you
say I took great interest in your spiritual welfare,
and I assure you I shall always do so when any
opportunity may occur. I feel very great pleasure
in forwarding to you the enclosed certificate of
your marriage. I need not assure you that your
secret is quite safe in my hands.—Faithfully yours
in Jesus Christ, " BERNARD MOONEY."
The case for the plaintiff having closed,
Mr. Brewster, Q.C., rose to address the court and
jury for the defendant. After some prefatory
observations, the learned gentleman contended
that the case was not as between Mr. Thelwall
and Mr. Yelverton, but between Mrs. and Mr.
Yelverton. Mr. Thelwall was the champion of
Mrs. Yelverton, who was admitted as a witness to
sustain a case in which she could not be either the
plaintiff or witness in a case against her husband.
He admitted that Mrs. Yelverton was a woman
of great talent, perhaps the most highly-
gifted woman he had ever seen. These talents
were highly cultivated, whether in the best
schools or not he could not say, for her success
would be the utter ruin of her husband, with whom
she would fall as irreparably ruined. He was pre-
pared to prove that Major Yelverton was not the
wooer in the intimacy; but that, on the contrary,
he had done all in his power to avoid her. She was
a woman of the strongest determination that could
be conceived. He commented upon the letters of
Mrs. Yelverton, and upon the description she gave
of her father. He said this was enough to make
one's blood curdle. That she wrote that letter at
such a time was extraordinary; and he did not
think any man could think that the writer of it
was the wife of Major Yelverton. He was endea-
vouring to put before them the character of those
parties. Mr. Brewster read some passages from
Mrs. Yelverton's letters, and commented upon the
descriptions which he said Mrs. Yelverton had given
of herself. In considering the case between the
parties, they should remember the views of a woman
in society. This lady wrote to Major Yelverton,
saying that she would go to Albania with him,
and watch the sun rise for him, and give him part
of her " pladdie," if he were as good as she was.
All that occurred before ever a word about the
marriage had been uttered by Major Yelverton.
He did not deny to the fair sex the privilege of
becoming the wooers if they thought fit. That
alight be for good or ill, but ho thought that in
this country they should stick to the old cus-
tom, and that the gentleman should follow the
lady, and not the lady the gentleman. Major
Yelverton was an officer in the army ; he could not
say whether he was good-looking, but that he had
some attractions there could be no doubt from the
fact of his having captivated a lady like Mrs. Yel•
verton. He did not deny that he used her badly,
but that was no reason why she should be his wife.
If she had come here in a breach of promise of mar-
riage case, it would be their duty to consider how
far he had used her well or ill. As to the evidence
of Mr. Lancaster, he did not think he had stated
correctly the law of Scotland. The learned coun-
sel here proceeded to comment upon the facts of the
case, commencing with the meeting of-Major and
Mrs. Yelverton on board the steamer when starting
from Boulogne, their arrival in London, the Major
getting a cab, and calling upon the lady in London.
Counsel said he was instructed to say the lady was
mistaken in her description of her arrival in Lon•
don, and that Major Yelverton got into the cab
with her, drove to a house which he thought was
her lodgings, and there dressed himself. He did
not mean to convey to the jury that any impro-
priety whatever took place between them on that
occasion. He contended that the lady had been
writing to Major Yelverton to go to Naples to see
her, and that he always found it convenient to let
the steamer go without him. He could not believe
that any man who had offered to take a woman to
be his wife could write a line to lower her in
her own estimation, or pollute her mind. Ile con-
' tended that there was not a line in Mrs. Yel-
verton's letters to show that she intended mar-
riage; and he was instructed to stale that it
was absolutely and entirely untrue that the
word marriage was ever uttered between
them at Galata. He read a letter from page 48 of