The Sun.
London, England, 1861-11-07 00:00:00

ROLLS COURT.
(Before Sir J. Romilly, Master of the Rolls.)
DAVESIES DE PONTES V. KENDAL-FORD V. DAVESIES DE

PONTES.-lIIDGMENT.

„His Honour the Master of the Rolls, in delivering judg-
ment, said—The points which 1 have to decide in this case
are very simple and very short ; but the facts which raise
these points, and which it will probably be necessary to
state how they arose, constitute a case of the most singular
and romantic character, as not likely to be found in any
case of fiction. The points which I haver to decide are,
whether the execution of a power contained in a will,
bearing date April 12, 1854, was or was not effectual;
o whether the revocation of it by two deeds—one
Aug. 24, 1854, and the other Sept. 29, 1854, was an effectual
revocation of it; and whether these deeds were inoperative
a d of non-effect. Now, I think it is essential to state an
tline of the facts which relate to this question, and which
are inseparable from the question, because the intentions of
the parties, and the acts of the parties go far to support the
validity of the deeds. It is admitted that the validity of
the deeds depend on the intentions of the parties. It ap-
peared that the lady, at the age of 16, formed an attach-
ment with a French young gentleman, and in the year
1823 both of them vowed an everlasting attachment,
and engaged to be married. She left Paris and came
came over to this country, and her friends persuaded her
that this was an idle attachment which she had formed in
Paris. In 1823 she married Mr. Dolphin, and in 1829, by
way of family arrangement, he executed three deeds, in one
of which he gave her the free income of the residue of his
real and personal estate in England. She afterwards sepa-
rated from her husband, and lived a solitary life till 1853.
She then returned to Paris and resumed her intimacy with
the French gentleman which she had formed 30 years pre-
viously. She found that he was in a position of high rank
—a general in the army. She wrote to him, and let him
understand, by the tenor of her correspondence, that
she wished a renewal of his friendship, and re-
ferred him to their former attachment. He was
then a bachelor. An interview took place in the
west of France. She raised £3OO on her husband's property,
and did not conceal her desire to get quit of her husband
and be the wife of the general. She was advised by a noble
lord there to proceed to Scotland, and get her husband to
reside there 40 days with a lady friend, and obtain a divorce
against him in the Scotch court. He proceeded to Scotland
with his paramour, and an action of divorce was instituted
against him; and, in order/ to establish her pleas, a consi-
derable sum of money was paid down, and £3OO a year pro-
mised was the effect of this arrangement. Her husband
was' then in reduced circumstances. She had difficulty in
taking the oath di calumnia, that she did not directly or
indirectly, by herself or friends, combine-or conspire to get
up this action, but the oath was taken and the divorce
obtained. She then went to France and married the gene-
ral, and executed a will in his favour, giving him all her
real and personal property. She afterwards executed a deed
sole in favour of her trustees. The general was informed
by his solicitor that the divorce in Scotland would not be
acknowledged in England, and, as he was not legally mar-
ried, he had no claim on her first husband's property.
His Honour dismissed the first cause without costs, and
alhwed Mr. Ford his costs in the second suit. His Honour
said the lady had deserted the general and died in a con-
vent in France.