The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-04 00:00:00

TEE SUN, LONDONI MONDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY f 4, 1861.

Consul. Admiral Willaumez acted in concert with
the French Consul, and, having heard of the mar-
riage, he wrote a letter to the Minister of Marine,
dated January 18, 1804, in which he informed him
that he had just heard that Jerome Bonaparte was
married to Miss Paterson, that he had done all
in his power to dissuade.. him from it, and hoped
he had succeeded, but after an interval of two
months he learned that the marriage had been solem-
nised. The Admiral concluded by expressing his
fear that the First Consul, as well as the Minister of
Marine, would be dissatisfied at Jerome's conduct.
Such being the facts, M. Allou contended that if
ever there was a clandestine and fraudulent marriage
it was that of the 24th ofDecember, 1803. He then
produced the registry of Terome Bonaparte's birth,
which showed that he was born in 1784, and was
consequently under 20 years of age at the period of
his marriage. M. Allen next stated that since the
last sitting of the Court a letter had been receivedby
Prince Napoleon from Mr. Gould, formerly secretary
to the American Embassy in London, which threw
further light on the questign M. Gould stated that
having observed during the pleadings in the Pater-
son-Bonaparte case that certain importance was
attached to the presumption that the marriage of
his mother had the sanction of the lex loci, and
that an act valid where it was consummated is
valid everywhere, on tie contrary, at the period
of the marriage its validity was doubted by
the most eminent jurists in the United States.
His father's opinion, whose reputation as a jurist
was of the highest, was asked at the time of the
marriage, and he said, without any hesitation, that
such a marriage might satisfy the conscience and the
reputation of the bride, but that its legal validity
was doubtful, inasmuch as the husband was a
foreigner (not having even a domicile), that he was
a minor, that he had not obtained the consent either
of his guardian or of his family, nor had he per-
formed any one of the acts or formalities necessary
to legalise his marriage in his own country. It was,
consequently, the opinion of M. Gould's father,
and several other American jurists, 'that if the mar-
riage were not legalised and ratified in France it
could not secure for Miss Paterson or for her chil-
dren any right of legitimacy or of inheritance on
the side of her husband. Moreover, it was well
known in the United States that all these argu-
ments were submitted to the consideration of Miss
Paterson herself, and that she knowingly incurred
the risk of finding herself at last only a morganic
wife, in order to enjoy the chance of the exalted
position to which she might pretend as a legitimate
wife. It is openly said in America that she played
for a high stake, and that she must take the bad
luck with the good. Such is the substance of M.
Gould's letter, on which Prince Napoleon's advocate
dwelt at some length. He then remarked that his
adversary had passed over in silence the will of
Miss Paterson's father, and that mournful look cast
by the father of the family on the disobedience and
misconduct of his daughter. The separation of the
young people was the act of the father ; their fac-
titious union the act of the daughter. So much for
the character of the marriage. The next point to
be considered is the absence of publication required
by the 170th Article of the French Code. With
regard to the decree Meyer, relied on by the
counsel for M. Paterson-Bonaparte, M. Allou op-
posed to it the judgment pronounced by M. Delangle
on the 9th of July, 1858, in the case of Dubonchage.
The law says that when a fraud is committed out of
France, whether -With'premeditation or not, to
which is added the want of consent of father or
mother, there is no mode of supplying the want of
consent by prescription. A marriage celebrated in
a clandestine manner remains clandestine. It is no
longer, as Daguesseau remarked, a private injury,
but a public offence. M. Allou then argued that
Miss Paterson never obtained the rights of a French
woman, Having arrived at Lisbon she and her hus.
band separated, never to see each other again. So
much for the mother. Now, with respect to the son,
can he pretend to have been treated as a legitimate
son because he has received letters which were read
in court from the true wife, the Princess of Wur-
temburg ? It is the kindness of the legitimate wife
to the child who is not that is disclosed by these
letters. M. Allen then,replied to the legal objection
raised by the opposite counsel to the validity of the
decree of the 30th Ventese, year 13, in consequence
of the word projet having been endorsed on it. He
read a letter from Count de Laborde, Director-
General of the Archives of the Empire, which ex-
plains that the word projet was endorsed on the
draught of the decree, which subsequently became
definitive. He then continued—
" While listening just now to the impassioned
language of my contradietor—"
" M. Berryer, interrupting—No ; I have no pas-
.

sions.
" M. Allou—Oh ! M. Berryer, whether you know
it or not, you are possessed of the oratorical passion,
which does honour to the advocate, and which I
would desire to find for, amoment in order to reply
to you."
He then remarked that M. Berryer contested
the fact of the marriage of the Duke de Berry
with a Miss Brown in England. However that
may be, the right to annul such marriages
is monarchical, and accepted by all lawyers as
inconteatible: It was by the same principle
adduced on the occasion of declaring null the
marriage of Gaston d'Orleans, that the Emperor
Napoleon annulled the marriage of his brother
Jerome. M. Allou then complained that in the
memorial presented to the Court it was stated that
a written opinion existed, given by MM. Troplong,
Baroche, and Abattucci at a consultation, to the
effect that the marriage of 1803 is null, but that
the offspring of the marriage is legitimate. No
such opinion was ever given, as appears from the
following letter addressed by M. Troplong to
Prince Napoleon, and dated the 27th of January :
" Monseigneur,-4 find no difficulty in declaring
by writing what I had the honour to tell you the
other day. Never did I take part in any consulta-
tion tending to establish the nullity of the mar-
riage of 1803, and the legitimacy of M. Jerome
Bonaparte-Paterson, the son. It was certainly in
consequence of incorrect information supplied to
M. Berryer that that lawyer wrote in his" Me-
moire" (page 76) that there existed in the hands of
his client a consultation, with reasons at full length,
signed MM. Abattucci, Baroche, and myself, and
thus summed up Ist. M. Jerome Bonaparte
ought to be considered a legitimate child in France.'
I repeat to your highness that this assertion is
false in every point, and nobody can place me in
contradiction with the definitive decision to which I
have conscientiously adhered. Your Imperial High-
ness may make what use you please of this letter.
" TROPLONCO
M. Allon concluded his able argument by obser-
ving that there could be no difficulty in deciding
between the two marriages—one contracted se-
, cretly, and in violation of his promise, by a boy of
19 ; the other celebrated in the face of the world,
with all the formality of the law and all the pomp
of religion.
The Court adjourned at three o'clock until
Friday next, to hear the Imperial Advocate,

(AntnittisEnnsrl—We quote a few more of the, extra
ordinary cures without medicine effected by Du Barry's
delicious health,rostoring Revalenta Arabica Food
Cure No. 180.-25 years nervousness, constipation, indiges-
tion and debility, from which I have suffered great misery,
and which no medicine could remove or relieve, have been
effectually cured by Du Barry's Food in a very short time,
W. D. Reeves, 181, Fleet-street, London. No. 4208,
eight years dyspkoeia, nervousness, debility, with
cramps, spasms, and nausea, for which my ser-
vant had consulted, the adticie of Many, have been
effectually cured uy Du Barry's health-restoring
Food. I shall be happy to answer any inquiries.
Rev. John W. Flavell, Ridlingtori Rectory`, Norfolk.
Avoid Pills and Medicines : they invariably aggravate and
perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, disappointment,
and expense may bo avoided by using Du Barry's Food
which, at a few pence per day, sates 50 times its cost in
other remedies removing effectually, NI, .thout purging,
constipation, Indigestion (dyspepsia) nervous, bilious and
liver oomplamts and all their consequences. Certificate
No. 30,418. We find it the safest remedy. Andrew Ure,
MD., F.ILS., Dr llarvey, Dr. Wurzer, Dr. Shorland, Dr.
Campell. Let invalids avoid the fearful dangers of spu-
rious and injurious imitations offered under a variety of
false pretences. Nevill's imitations are prohibited by the
high Court of Chancery under a penalty of £5,000 against
Alfred Hooper Nevill and his agents ; and the pretences
that Nevill has a patent for Ara....ica Food and that Du
Barry's are connected with such patent are utterly false.
No canister is genuine without the name Barry Du Barry
and Co., 77, Regent-street, in full, ontheseal and wrapper.
Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article must
expect to be distrusted in all otters. Packed in tins 1113.
2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 6d. ; 51b. lls.; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s. The
M. and 241 b. canisters are sent carriage free on receipt
of Post-office order by Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Re-
P-ent-str eet, London; Fortnum Mason, and Co.; Abbit,
60, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 63 and 150, Ox-
bard-street ; .330 and 451, Strand; 49 and GO, Bishopsgate-
street ; Batty, 16, Finsbury Pavement; Phillips and Co.
tea-dealers; I 'etty, Wood, and Co. King William-street,
City; at 127, AQINat and all grwerof