Star.
London, England, 1822-12-23 00:00:00

nle

ones conduct was in qiiest.ion;ilabt4l4ll. fillece)rro•L
and 14. thb..BlPritk
fendaot-on the rocerwould' proubd to Jotter=
'him on that 01;00, tlley
dict of acquittal.
LACON V. 114GOINE, OTOE
h.
This was an action by the irsbandof Mrs. tAtiSfl;
,NBl *rh•
The Jury found the..Clefendatit.
nt betweettlthich,
1819, and December, 1820. The de
lototbreeczfeear a 1 a Mod.
that at the time of making the .
afoCr
odtriertssed
wife promises th the deck-
sresifin;intisalikeedr
ration, she was the w of Henry
• Higgins, which
f &Fa
which WAS denied in the replication by the plaintiff. •
Mr. SCAOLETT was ahriut to state the case, when
The Souiatoa-Gesertat. insisted on his right to
begin, as the affirmative of the issue lay on defendant.
Mr. SCA R LETT said he must still provethe amount
of the bill.
The Soract•ron-Germani replied that he would
admit the amount of the bill, having no witnesses to
contradict its items. He theft proceeded to open the
evidence, by which he intended to suppert the plea
of coverture. The defendant, a most respectable
Lady, the widow of Mr. Isaacs, an Officer in an
African Regiment, went in 1817 to reside at Paris.
There she became acquainted with Mr. Henry Hig-
gins, and was married to him by a Clergyman of tile
Church of England, named Sullivan, at Versailles.
At this marriage Mr. Higgins Everard and the wait-
ing-maid of the Lady were present; but, unfor-
tunately, Mr. Sullivan was dead, and Madame Si-
mond, the femme de chambre, had gone to Greece;
so that he could only call Mr. Higgins Everard• to
prove an actual mar, iage. He would shew, how-
ever,
by a sister of the defendant, that the parties left
Paris for the purposes of marriage; that they re-
turned as husband and wife; and that they had since
been received in the most respectable circles as such.
To prove this case, Miss Donovan, the sister of the
defendant, was first called, who appeared in a state
of great weakness and agitation, and was allowed a
chair. *Mr. GUrney repotted her answers, which
were given in a very low tone of voice. She stated
that her sister left Paris for Versailles to be married,
and returned as the wife of Mr. Higgins.
Mr. Higgins Everard swore to the actual mar-
riage, which was performed by a Protestant Clergy-
Man, though the parties were Catholics. This wit-
ness, who came up from Whitecross-street prison, ad-
mitted that he bad written letters to the plaintiff's at,.
torney. offering to withdraw from the country, so as
to avoid appearing as a witness, in consideration of
fifty pounds.
Lord Clanmorris, Sir W. S. Lilly, and Captain
Whiting, were called, who proved that they had met
the defendant and Mr. Higgins, who was al Attorney
at Dublin, as Mr. and Mrs. Higgins, in tae most re-
spectable society of both sexes.
Mr. Alderman Wood was called, but did not ap-
pear. He had been in Court in the early part of the
day, but had quitted it to preside over the meeting
of his Ward.
Mr. ScarthErT-addressed the Jury on the evidence,
and contended that there was no credible proof of an
actual marriage. Was it credible that these parties
should go to Versailles, when they might have been
married in the Chapel of the Ambassador, without
the trouble and delay of the journey ? Was it ere=
dible that, being Catholics, they would contract mar-
tine in a form which could not bind their con-
sciences ? Where were the witnesses of the cere-
mony? Madame Simond was 'gone to Greece, and
Mr. Sullivan was gone—to Heaven ; and the Lady
had taken away the certificate in her pocket, as the
only party interested in keeping it. lie contended
that Mr. Everard was utterly unworthy of credit ;
he said that he should he able to prove that the de-
-Pendant had obtained her pension by the name of
Isaacs, and that she was introduced to Mr. Lacer as
a dashing widow with a large jointure. Besides this,
he should contend that the mart iage, supposing it to
have been performed, was invalid by the law of
France; for he could chew that by that law no mar-
riage was good, unless contracted before the Mayor
of the district where the parties had resided for six
weeks—unless contracted in the presence of four male
witnesses—and unless authenticated by the certificate
of the Magistrate. There was an exception as to mar-
riages performed In the Ambassador's Chapel, and;
under his sanction.
To prove this to be the French law, the French,
Vice-Consul was called, who produced a book pro-;
fessing to be a digest of French law, and published'
by the authority of Government, which contained.
the law as stated by Mr. Scarlett. The witness said
that this book, if produced in any Court in France,
would be acted upon as law: that there were no ori-
ginal records; but that the corrected copies of the
laws, published by authority, were the only docu-
assents to which reference could be made.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL objected to this book, as
not being evidence of anything, The French Could
never be so unhappy as to have all their -law con-
-mined in an octavo volume; and nothing would be
•easier than to buy one of these works, and introduce
any interpolated passage to answer any purpose.
The Counsel for the plaintiff replied, that exactly.
the same specks of evidence, of the Spanish law, was
received by Lord Elienborough on the trial of Sir.
Thomas Picton, for torture to Louisa Calderon, where*
the Attorney• General of Trinidad was admitted to
prove that the books produced contained the laws of
the Island.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE thought that, on the'
authority of this case, he must receive the book as•
evidence of the French law, though he should have
greatly hesitated to do so if this precedent had not
existed. If, then, he received this evidence, he was
clearly of opinion that 'the marriage, void'by the law
of the country where it took place, could not be re-
cognized here. This had been decided in the case
of Dalrymple v. Dalrymple, by Lord 'Stowell, and
therefore he was. bound to hold the marriage void,
and the plaintiff entitled to recover.
The Jury then (as the amount was not disputed)
found for theplaintiff—Damages £416 17s. Qd.

An Inquest was held on Saturday evening, at the
Light Horseman, Orange-court, Castle-stieet, Lei-
cester-square, before •Mr. Higgs, Coroner, on the
body of Charlotte Lewis, a woman of the town,.who
was wandering about in great distress, and who waS
-first taken.to St. Martin's watchhothe, and after wards
to the woi khouse. Verdict—L,, That the deceased
came by her death through exceseite 41iuking, and
the inclemency of the weather."

POLICE LifIOWTOIDICE.
G iVi
Hairier,Jitter, Michael Jires lbairoPM4!Mjll4l.ll"...% Ff''''SaMP • """`.lll"t"Pfy jallunft,
,Willisch Law, Samuel favt„(isorge Snsititl:Ast BredineliK, n,: g. sat.
mud pea,Theas.ivihmh
Ntrlek, ilitederchek.P . John TralL
Hen Bat cd. Gong and hews
2klines, were t Up in the,custodt olVraet4i arlaituth*ti,
PeneiPal elitinrsiaidatod by Limbrlck and liend,len. and others
at the Police, charged inideralte Vagrant Act, with bring fiend
Ina common gambling-honsei Re i Iluey-sweet, St. James's,
mad playing and betting at unlawful genuttetherein.
Mr. John Itlehttioudi °neat the clurksof thii office, and C.
T.l linthveo, ass stated, SW' they. accompanied Mr.
Han% the Magistrate to tee house in question., and that being
refusestailmittance, Muntrucind, the patrol, 'teas hniited over
the wall, who.unfastiped:the chain, and admitted the Magis-
trate and officer/. Al the defendants. Were found in the house,
except one, who, afteia,a long search, was discover el "(but
until be had cried out Om help) in a water hut:, is the yard, im-
mersed to the chin in a* water. A roulette table sius founit
in the place, and a paper on which was written, " ifr •Gil:'
is to put into the hank £3l, and Mr. Odell £29; silver, X 29;
sovereigns, all.
William Phillips was died called and sworn. 1 have been a
Clerk in a counting-house, but am now out of employment. j
was in the house, Nu. 16, Itury-steeet, St. James's, last evi-nOo:
when the Magistrates and Officers entered. The gani: IZot-t:
lette was then playing. Thee were from. eighteen to twetev
persons in the gambling-room. I can identity the defendant
Mr. Page and 'Air. Paton, as being. actually at play at that mo-
ment. They had stakes on the.table. The mau now calling him-
self James Jones. but whom I always knew as Al r. :ctrl
generally as Croupier ; he sat at the table, and paid and rectived
money lost and won. lie was one of the-proprietors of the liens!,
at least so considered. George Johnson acted in a similar
parity, and was at the table at the time the officers entered. Tae
witness also identified Hugh King and Thomas liedeisilate as
taking a part in the business of the horse, and continued; the re,t
were standing round the table, but I cannot say they Were pl., \ln.
About eleven o'clock a bell rang, and June-, alias Odell, penal
the room door, looked down, returned in great haste, and took
up one of the wooden boxes, containing gold and silver, and ran
up stairs; Hugh King took the other box and followed hint
the remainder dispersed various ways. .1 went down to the
kitchen. I had been there from tour to half-past seven in the
evening, before I came here to lay information. The game ev..s
then going nn, and the same persons were engaged in the ma-
nagement of it. Th.? defendant, Holder, is a waiter, and hands
about refreshments, such as wine, tea, fruit, &c. which are sue-
plied gratis. James Thompson is the porter, and lets in the com-
pany. Peters, I.ambton, Bachelor, Pell, John Jones, Paton,
Page, and Smith, I can swear to as being in the room when the
alarm was given.

was in the house of Harding and Co. in
Pal[-malt, and was dismissed about a fortnight ago, but fur cu
misconduct.

hive often played ?—Witness.—Yes.
You took the money when you won?— I did, but that was
very seldom indeed—(Laughter).
Where have you been all night?—ln the custody of an officer.
Have yon,received a promise that you should not he sent to
the Tread upon your giving evidence ?—Ne, I have not.
I believe yo asked for the loan of some money at the house,
and they refused it, and then you camehere to give information.
Was ir not so?,I did ask for the loan of £ when I had lust
every shilling I had, and it was refused.
Mr. ALLEY then htldressed the Magistrates for upwards cf as
haur, and, taking a general review of the evidence, conteneiel
that there was no case made out to warrant a conviction of any
of the parties. The Learned Counsel made some strong obser-
vations upon the Act of Parliament, by the provisions of which,
he said, gentlemen of high and honourable character in the
world were to be designated and punished as " rogues and vc-
gabonds," without having committed an immoral act. Upti a
second conviction they were to be deemed "incorrigible,`' aid
he liable to two years confinement, and hard labour; and if
found a third time in a gaming-house, they became felons. ..nd
were subject, not only to transportation, but the forfeiture of
their goods and chattels. Some of the gentlemen now charge!
were Officers of the Army—men who had trod the field of glory;
who had not hesitated to walk up to the cannon's moutb, and to
enter fearlessly the deadly breach in the service of their Kin;
and Country ; and were these honourable men to he devinAl
rogues and vagabonds--t be deemed incorrigible--and to be
liable at some future conviction to be transported as felons? It
was monstrous, end really men who passed laws should look a
little to the consegoences of them before-hand. lie trusted the
Magistrates would be very cautious how they enforced the pro-
visions of such a statute.

......
Mr. Haus, after a consultation with Mr. Mizsnutt., said—
" I convict James Jones, alias Odell, Thomas Iledesdale. (;core
Johnson, alias Pearce, 'igh King, Samuel Page, and John
Paton, as rogues and vagabonds, within the meaning of the Sta-
tute of the 3d of Geo. IV. cap. 43, and sentence Jones, alias
Odell, liedesdale, Johnson, and King, to three months, and
Page and Paton to one month's imprisonment, in the !lonia of
Correetion, there to be kept to hard labour."
Titompson, John Junes, Smith, Pell, Lamhton, Pe—
ters, and Batchelor, were.nrdered to give security, themselves in
£5O, and two sureties In £25, that they would nut be fount) la
a gaming-house for twelve months; and the remainder were dis-
charged, each on his own recognizance in £3O.
. _