The Sun.
London, England, 1827-08-16 00:00:00

EXTRACTS FROM COUNTRY PAPERS.

OXFORD CIRCUIT-SHREWSBURY, AUG. 14.

SIONLIS V. DAWES AND HARM= HIS wins.
This was an issue, directed by the Lord Chan-
cellor, to try whether the plaintiff, Mr. Evan Morris,
was the legitimate son of Mr. William Morris and
Mary his wife.
Mr. Sergeant RUSSELL (with whom was Mr.
Ctmwoon) said that this question was submitted a
second time to a Jury. It would appear that in
1778 Mr. Morris, at the age of 30, married Mrs.
Morris, then 16, and they had a daughter, who had
married Mr. Davies, one of the defendants ; but, in
,1788, it was found that a separation would conduce
to the happiness of the parties. At this time they
had lived together ten years, and, on the separation
caking place, it was arranged that Mrs. Morris
iwould go to reside at Llanfair, and Mr. Morris, who
lad before resided at Shrewsbury, went to live at
Argoed, which was a village about 14 miles from
Glanfair. It would be proved that after the separa-
tion there was continued kindness between thepartieti,
ind that Mr. Morris waS continually at the house of
nis wife. The plaintiff was born on the sth of Jan.
1793; and he should prove that Mr. Morris conti,
tually visited his wife for several years before the
birth of the plaintiff, and particularly in 1792.
It would be shown that communications the most
Frequent took place between Mr. and Mrs. Morris ;
and it would appear, that about Lady-day in 1792,
Vlr. Morris called at the house of his wife; that they
met in the passage, when they embraced and shed
-ears, and after that they went into the parlour,
where they remained several hours; and at the eon_
elusion of this interview they went together to the
louse of Mrs. Lloyd, at Gwrddllwydd, where there
was most satisfactory evidence that they passed the
night together. And this was not the only evidence,
chatai
in
yl7w9i2t n
Mr. e s s e wouldsmorris wasbe c ac 10l
ne d, t
in who w
u al
ly
ateul d prove
the
house
if his wife; and indeed the proof on this part of the
7. .ase was so clear, that but for the subsequent con-
luct of Mrs. Morris there never could have been a
iuestion raised on the legitimacy of the plaintiff.
Mrs. Morris was a woman of violent spirit, who, as
t would appear, indulged her passions towards the
Alter sex; and he would admit that she had taken
is a sort of favourite a man named William Austin,
.vho at first was a mere servant of Mr. Morris, but
tfter that it was clear that at a later period there was
in illicit intercourse between him and Mrs. Morris.
At the close of 1792, Mrs. Morris first 'conceived
he design of concealing the birth of the plaintiff;
ind as soon as he was born it would be shown that
i;rdouisgthant
to was conveyed in the night to a place called Wem,
euepodfntdheirrtythemnialems,e
oanfdAuthstaitn,be
snbnand.
if the father of the paramour of Mrs. M. •
.
, and it -
lone by Mrs. M., or under her
.directiond•vulged the facte
pro-
bably occurred to her, that if she divulged
bei her 1
a t
Tthihw
esa swhtaohslei
asr
leel
to cause dug_
her having a child,the effect would
late nenodtionnotnoofth
eurnici
uo
band to wish her to
with Austin,'as
s law
and
do f
Juries Et i England l a:ldd ryas,
10 n
On
illicit •
with females who had an intercourse with
capricious
o f the cou country. persons other than their
.husbands, that the child
making a breach betwyen her and Austin and
he knew of her illicit iranetebrcaockurstoe hishouse, and
was the child o
woman,
By the
eupooldn
Ica:
But, however Mrs. Morris might intend to bas-
tardise her issue, still the law of England would not
allow her
uhleers,tuopdoon sNov.meAti sjutdhgee
that a person's legitimacy should not depend upon
might probablyf hhaervefavhoattlir'
theiet e cdofnodrutehte ofgo
good
if a child was born, it was held to be the legitimate
?ion of the husband, if the husband was at any place
within the kingdom, inter quatu maria, as it was
termed; however, that rule, became afterwards ex-
ploded; but still the undoubted rule of law now re-
mained, that unless it was shown to be impossible
that the husband could be the father, of the child, it