The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-03-11

v
was present at her birth, and know that Mr.. Clark
claimed and acknowledged her TO be his child;
she was born IN 1905; neither knew, nor had any
reason 10 believe that any other child besides Myra
was born Of that marriage. The circumstances Ut
her marriage with Daniel Clark were theses -(By
her, II Is OF course presumed that the witness
means Zulme; though up to this point in her ties.
ilmony she does moi mention her nancy Several
| years after her marriage with De Grange. she
heard that he had living wife; our family charged
HIM with the crime OF blgamy In marrying said
Zullme; he at inst denied II, but afterwards adj
mltted 1t, and fled from the country. These cir
cums,snces became public, aud MIR; Clark made
proposals OF marriage to my sister with the, know
ledge of all our family. 1t was considered essen
nal, fret to obtain record proof Of DE Grange hav
mg living wife at the time he married my sister;
10 obtain which, from the records OF the Catholic
church in New York, (where Mr.. De Oranges
pror marriage was celebrated,) We sailed for that
CITY. On our arrival there, We found that the
pls,ry OF marriages had been destroyed Mr.. Clark
ailived after us. We heard that a Mr.. Gardette,
Then living in Philadelphia, was one OF the wit
nesses to Mr.. De Oranges prior marriage. We
| proceeded 10 that city and found MIR. Gardette-
He answered, that he was present at the said prior
marriage ct DE Grange. and that he afterwards
knew DE Grange and his wife by this marriages.;
| mat this wife had sailed tor France. Mr. Clark
| then said, you have no reason longer 10 refuse
beng married to me; II Will, however, be necessary
| 10 keep our marriage secret till have obtained
judicial proof Of The nulty OF your and DE Oranges
marriage. They, the said Clark aud the said
| Zullme were then married Soon afterwards, our
SISTER, Nj dame Caiilavtt, wrote to us from New
| Orleans, that DE Oranges wife, whom he had mar
NED pIior 10 marrying The said Zulme, had arrived
al New Orleans. We FASTENED our rctuTn 10 New
Orleans. He was prosecuted for b,gamy, father
Antoine, OF the Catholic church, takng part in the
| proceedings against DE- GraDge. Mr.. DeGrange
was condemned Tor bigsmy in marrying the said
| LUllme, and was cast into prison, from which he
secretly e.csped by connivance, and was taken
Gown The MISSISSIPPI riverby Mr.. LIE Breton Dor
seDois, Where he got mo vessel, escaped from
| he country, and, according to the best of my
knowledge and belet, never afterwards re.
uufBtC to Louisiana This happened in 1903 not
1 great while before the close OF the Spanish
| government III LOUISIANA. MIR. Clark told us, that
| before he could pTOmugate his marriage with my
sister, IT would be necessary that there should be
brought by her an action against the name of De-
Grange. The anticipated change OF government
created delay, but at length, IN 1906, MIR James
Brown and Elgus Fromentn, as the counsel of
my sister, brought suit against the name of De-
Grange, IN the City Court, think, of New Or.
leans. The grounds of SAID suit were, that De-
Grange had imposed hlmselt upon her at the time
when he had a living, lawful wife Judgment In
said suit was rendered against said DeGrange. Mr.
CLARK still continued 10 defer prOmulg iting his
marriage with my sister, which very much fTetted
and irrItated her feelings. Mr.. Clark became
member Ut the United States Congress In 1906
Whilst he was IN Congress, my sister heard hat he
was counting Miss Cation, Of Baltimsre She was
much distressed, though she could not believe the
report, knowing hersef TO be his wife. Still, his
straDee conduct in deferring promugate his mar
r1sge with her, had alarmed her. Sne and sailed
for PhIladslphla, To get proof of his marriage with
my sister. We could find no record, and were told
that The priest who married. her and Mr.. CLARK had
gone TO Ireland. My sister then sent for Daniel W.
Coke, mentioned to him the rumor he answered
that he knew II TO be true, that he. (Clark,) was
eDgaged toh her, Miss Caton) My sister replied,
that II could not be He then told her that she
would not be able TO establish her marriage with
CLARK, II he were disposed to contest it. He adj
would send one. A Mr. Smyth came and told
my sister that che could not legally establish her
marriage with Mr.. Clark, and pretended to read to
her letter in English, language then unknown
"a my sister, from MIR. Clark to Mr.. Coke, stating
he was about to marry Miss Cation. In conse-
quence OF this information, my sister Zulime came
To The resolution OF having no further connection
OF intercourse with Mr.. Clark. and soon afterwards
married Mr. Gsrdette, OF Philadelphia. The wit
ness further states, that she became acquainted
with DtGrapge In 1888 He was a noblemsn by
birth, and married Zuiime when she was thirteen
years old Zuhme had two children by hlm-a boy
End girl the boy died, the girl Is still living,
ussS); her name Is Caroline, and married TO Dr.
bsIsss Wines was present at the birth Of these
Que. BESIDES the witness, Mr. Dorser, of New
Orleans, and all Irish gentleman, friend OF CLARK,
rem New York, were present at the marriage.
Catholic priest performed the ceremony. Before
The detection OF The bigamy OF DeGrange, Zulime
had u son who died, and daughter called Caro-
| Ilnt, which bore his name. Caroline was born in
lsoi; MuDess was present at her birth, well az
that II her brother. The natural language Of wit.
ness IL French, but her nephew well acquainted
with the English language, and when In need of
translator, she applies TO him."
have, IN justice to this witness, stated all the
material facts detailed IN her testimony taken IN
1859, before proceed to compare it with that SUBJ
sequentIy taken in 1915 and Is49. Her testimony
taken In lS+5, for the part, repetition of
what she stated In 1899, with the addition OF some
facts which may be important in weighing her
credibihiy. For instance, she states that the first
time she saw MIR. Clark was in the latter part of
1902 She was shortly afterwards introduced to
HIM by Colonel Bellechasse. Zullme was married
| TO Mr., Clark Miss Zuhme de Carrere The
lsst time she saw DeGrange was IN 1908. In lss9,
the says che was well acquainted with Daniel
CLARK; that her acquaintance with him CONNER need
about, or not long after, 1907. His marriage with
Zullme, to the best OF her recollection took place
IN 1903, although there are some associations in
her memory which make her think it not lmpos.
slble that the marriage may have taken place IN
IeO2 Her impression Is that IT took place ia 1903.
|, was, che remembers, a short time previous to
MI. ClaTks departure for Europe.
Let us first consider this evidence with reference
to Itself alone. IL was taken at three different
periods, and, we must presume, was not given
without much reflection. In the year 1916, she
says, that The sist time she saw Daniel Clark
was IN the latter part OF ls02, and even then,
bad no acquaintance with him, for she was
.hoity aiierwsId introduced to him by Colonel
sbellt chase In ls49 che says, her acquaintance
with hlm commenced about, or notong after, 1877.
In lso9 sbe states, without any qualification what
ever, that Chalk was married in 1903 In 1915, che
again states this fact and on both occasions, she
rtf,rs To other facts with which she couples thus
important event, so as to render II perfectly GER
tam thst TIE maIrIsge did take place at the tune
and place stated BY her For instance, IN 1852 she
says that The proposals made by Clark to Zulime,
made alter The detection Of the bigamy Of De
Change hrs che declares, in unqualified terms, |
was IN 1913, and not great while before the close
81 The Spsnsh government IN Louisiana. In 1St5, |
she again ssys, that DE Grange was convicted Of |
bissny IN 1903 la ls49, IN referring TO the con-
yc'ion and escape Of DE Change, che, for the first
tine, omits TO stse the year. but says that il hap
ptned not great while before the cessation OF the
Slsnish gov, fbment in LOUISIANA. In this depo- |
sitiob OF ls49, we find thus witness, for the first
time, expressing the slightest doubt about the mar |
'isge IT ClsIk having taken place in 1903. She |
ssys, 40 the besf IL my recollection II was in |
rus, although there ere some associations in my |
m.moIy which make me think 1t not impossible |
that the marriage may have taken place in 1902; |
ny impression. however, 10, that Il took place in
lsO3 IL was abort before Mr.. Clarks departure |
Tor Europe"