The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-03-05

nal hne n.d mace them olives known, an inventory wss
dswn pp IN wacn declared thai in the maternal
~, iIe 1esS 49, oeen ssceitained. On the % Sep EN-
os, Of the ne 10 v.ny and de Lery proceeded 70
200 600 francs AZ real estate. Estimated At ooo
isnes vas e ed in hind the 23d Of the zane month
IN SIeece re- Asined undivided. This was tbs situson
o. anissp On, the 9th Ostober 1854 M,ssrs CO Val.
NY Pid GO Ly received summons at the request of
mrs oP by birth willing, and others pretsnd,ng
70 re ScLy heirs OF the Duchess de Paisancs Of the
% maze al hne ia her quality as child Mrs. Eliza
va FIRST cousin Of the Duchess de Paissncs aud niece
% Madame Barbe de Marbois, BY birth Moore mother
q said Duchess The oeject Of this summons to
claim IL hessrs de valmy and de Lery the partition OF
the Inheritance the sale of the estates depending on IT,
Meesrs &c vamy ard de Lsry demanded the 1stca ion
Mrs. Rio gwsy through her agents, deposited With Nc.
DuIsnt pubic notary at Paris various pro fs establish
ing 10 tt cir opinion her rights to the inheritance Of
Mess,s. De valmy and de Lery ackno -ledged these
proofs establishing the descent Of Mrs. Rdgxsy from
Thomas cyd Moore; but they alleged That they did not
prove that there had been Legitimate marriage bet wesn
William Moore and Sarah Lloyd before the birth of Ma
dame Bsrbe e M,reois taer dsughtsr no more than
thty pre- we'd the lison Of Thomas Lloyd Moore grand
Marb0s.
on the exhibition Of certificates Of marriage birth
In order to comply with tins rsquI rement Mrs. Ridg
way exhibited an extract Of family Biole containing
Iisee thomas Lloyd Moore, born on Saturday Jan 20,
1852 at O'Clock in the morning; ELIZABETH born on tho
1s,h of March, l7e4 at Eve minutes after two in the
afternoon"
After these pieces were put in the cause pursued its
course and the Civil Tribunal Of the Seine rendered
the Is h July, 1855, the following Judgment
In what concerns the intervention con0jpg that in
tairg notice the points BY De amy and de Lery
which are Ill founoe1 the proofs required of the hus
band and wife Rdg'sy are supplied By the exhibits
Orders in consequence that the tide Of the Inventory
drawn up by Fouid notary 10 Paris after the de:ssse Of
the patensl line. be rectfed conformity with the
rights and qualities ct all the Interested parties that
moreover the said inventory be revised and verified ~
uIaps notary in Paris and that mention of the
be mace On the margin of the draught of the
Orders, that all notoral documents which may ha W
been dawn at the request of the heirs thu psterna
line shall oe rectfed BY the notary, In conformity
Declares and vod ell deeds Of partition of personal
property es,a which would have been made between
heirs OF the paternal line on.y.
Declares the present judgment common to the wife, Sau
Ihrows The costs upon the husband aud wife, R5gway
their against De valmy and De Lsry
Condemns De Valmy and De Lery jointly and severaly
to all the cOsts.
Mesrs De valmy and De Iery lodged an appeal against
On her side Mrs. Rdgway lodged an incidental appeal
founded the fact of the Tribunal having omitted
dent ON the heritage OF Madame De Paisance.
In consequence Of this double appeal the again
came before the court. on the 22d OF January last.
to the cAcusscn Of the matter Itself Mrs Rdgway should
be compelled to exhibit and to deposit At the clerks
office Of the court the smy Bible containing the above
The Court rendered the same day decision by which
it adjourned the to the Goth January. To-day
(Jan. 800 the affair again up.
N. Berger advocate of N. De valmy, began by re.
polling the reproaches nade against Messrs De valmy
and ns dy Of having been to feize on tue
As to Mrs Ridgway, 1.-THE advocate continues how
can she eomplsn Of such state Of thingsY At that
America order to epoy the pleasures or Parisan e
In consideration of her brilliant beauty, her youth aud
her cher the most exquisite salons thrown open to
her she was acquainted with what called kgrand monde
and constantly kept advised OF whstever passed
there How would have BEE possible for her be gno
rant Il the death of the Duchess de Pasanoe9 she must
have teen advised of it the funeral circular
~hich she Acknowledges addressed to her py the
Duke do Valmy. Furthermore could she be of
the rights she had to exerce in regard to the inheri
tancef Could she be ignorant that there of
laoIshp between her and the Duchesse de Pai,ance,
whatever the mature Of these ties may have b.enY
ton of the family Kelerman, would she not, from the
day Of her arrival at Paris have has.ened this
relation ship and to take advantage of In order to
large still the circle OF her acquaintance? This
ignorance OF her tights would to prove first and
iertmss that her alleged rights were not serious aud
that they existed On the Both October her claim
Wss put in. MIS-. Ridgwsy, in her bill, styles her.
sell iecond cousin but no explanation follows this
allegation. Imme dately Messrs. valmy and de Lery
offer her amicsble partition with the sole coudi
that Mrs. Rdgwsy shculc establish her rights. THIS
reasonable proposition is neither accepted nor refused
On he 226 23d December she and her agents are In
ved 20 assist at the nOtary's office at the deposrg Of
the papers and titles These papers, of which there
and state that the plaintiff in direct nn4
Thomas Lloyd Moore. 1t would have been also inpor
tant to prove That this Thomas Lloyd More was the
The extracts however, did not prove ANYTHING OF that
sort The point merits observation. The steam
DO justice to OBJECTION Now the documents Srouss
by the fol owing:-Two notarial document three
declarations Of Witnesses the copy Of the inscruocs
found In a family Bible Q testament of Sarah Lloyd
Of the year 1857, and second testament Of the same
year.
Mr.. de vany, through the medium of thu Minister Of
Foreign Affairs, caused steps t, be taken very crcum
santsl made in the Uni ed States which
proved rutess At the Court OF FIJI st Instance every
Of tbe documents exhibited by adversares
the object Of special discussion between my then
nent, NJ Pallet, an6 myself
rsge Barbe de Marbos with Elizabeth Moore whei
stated that the latter born the 18th March,
1764, by W. Moore and Sarah Lloyd bis wife, asked
Moore really had contracted legitimate marriage with
Sarah LIoyds They camored against us, and sad-'Do
you ,ben believe that Mr. BarDe de Marbos would have
married natural chidf To that replied, That one
ought lot to judge of the hen tuaton by present
cea but take into consideration the manners AID Gus
toms which prevailed among the American coloaiss and
the facility of which had become proyerbisL Indeed
Mr. de Marbois himself might well have yeoed to
the current G those IDEAS he might have entered into
cut thinning 1t derogaory to the dignity of his post
to his ptIson mel position.
At all events the simple declaration in his deed Of
arisge OF the qualification of husband and wife, given
to Mr.. w. Moore and Sarah Lloyd did attest their
marriage before the birth Of the daughter whom they
gave Mr.. Bsrte de Msrbois in marriage On the her
hand in his act which recalls to mind the penalties
sgaipst false witnesses in acts OF marriage you do not
appear any witness the part of the brie there
only witnesses the side of Mr. &c Mnbois, and,
nevertheless IN the contract Of marriage find that
she was a'so assisted by witnesses.
urtfc S,ah oy GSafn nf
b,ee OF the 18th March, 1894 and when this certificate OF
baptism again cisco The time Of the death of Nine de
harbis dated the 18th June 1764 But this is not
In 1856, u daughter of Mr. Barbe de Marbois chrisen
ed neither godfather godmother appear the part
OF the family Moore Let us declare moreover, thai as
regards Mr. Barbe de harbol, the suspicion concerning
the legality of the iatlon of his wife has ceased
to be ogtaed fact which is attested by the witnesses
whose dclsrA ions shall produce in particular by
peIon Of eighty three years who had remained for sixty
seven years in the FANNY Kelermann. Mr. Berryer here
read the judgment against which appeal had been
ltdgeu, and contin ued thus
In law the tribunal shows itself too absolute. With
civil condition Gf has its founda-