The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-04-17
TIE BALTIMORE BONAPARTES, AND N.
THEIRS HISTORY OF THE CONSULATE

parte family. Upon the appearance, it seems, Of
the eighth volume of NJ. Thiers History, Mr.
Jerome N. Bonaparte, of Baltimore, when he saw
the manner in which the historian described hi
mothers marriage and divorce, wrote reclama
tion against its truthfulness, and afterwards OBJ
tained Judgment before tribunal, condemning
M. Thiers to insert the reclamation in the seven.
teenth volume of his History, then. about to ap
pear. When the volume appeared, few weeks
since, with Mr.. Bonaparte's reclamation appended
the volume seized and suppressed by the
| police. The suppression of a volume of NJ. Theirs
History was too important procedure not to at
| tract universal attention to the cause.
council of the Imperial Family was held to
take the matter into consideration, and it was
! finally decided by the Emperor, that the volume
with the reclamation appended, should appear, but
that it should be accompanied by reply; and tc
the Prince Napoleon, as the party most interested
the duty of preparing the reply was entrusted
| The following is the reclamation OF Mr.. Bonaparte
| On the oath of December, 1903, M. jerome
Bonaparte, youngest brother of Napoleon l., )ther
simple officer of marine in the service of the French
| Republic, married Miss Elizabeth Paterson, daugh
ter of honorable citizen of the United States the
marriage was celebrated at Baltimore, by the Bish
op OF that city, according to the rites of the Holy
Catholic Church, and the act of marriage in
|
| dra of Baltimore
NJ. jerome Bonaparte, then 10 years of age, had
passed the age required by the French law for
tracing valid marriage. Art. l44 of the Civil
| Code.)
This marriage was not tainted with any of the
absolute defects pronounced by Art lS4 of the same
| Code.
The father of NJ. Jerome Bonaparte was dead;
his mother Madame Latitia BoHaparte, surviving
alone, her consent not required for the validity
of the marriage, neither by the American law nor
| by the canons of the Church. According to the
| French law, the nuty resulting from the absence
of paternal or maternal consent was not absolute,
the nullity not having been demanded during the
| year in which the marriage was made known to
| the mother. Art l83 of the Civil Code.)
| Nine. Latitia never demanded a judicial nuity
| OF the marriage of her son jerome; the contra
ry, IN her subsequent correspondence Nine. Latitia
called her dear son, NJ. jerome Napoleon Bona
parte, the issue of this marriage and especially in
letter dated Nov. 10, 1929, where she elicitates
him on his marriage, and signs herself in these
terms-your very ofectionoe mother.
The Princes Joseph and Louis Bonaparte have
| also always, and in writing, qualified him by the
title of nephew.
In 1903, Napoleon Bonaparte shared the dignity
ofConsul of the Republic with two other French
citizens: he was not invested with any of the
/ rights which belong to the chiefs of sovereign
| houses, and consequently could not demand that
| his consent be asked to the marriage of members
OF the family. The Premier Consul, therefore, had
no legal authority to recognize refuse to recog-
nize the validity of the marriage of his brother.
In 1905, the oath of May the First Consul, then
become the Emperor Napoleon, wrote as follows to
Holiness ehich ,oW annM this marriage. Your
Holiness ,cW please do this without ana noise it ,ci
only be 'ohen shall kno,o that you wiHing that
shall break the ciUH marriage.'"
The Holy Father responded to the Emperor by
lengthy document, dated the 9th of June, 1906
i We there read:
''In order to guard the secret imposed on US, we
have made it an honor to comply with the greatest
| ,l,N1 80
this end we have charged oursef alone with the
examination of the question of marriage. :
We regret not to be able to nd single ,ohich
a0oatd authorize as to decree the nuy the MARRIAGE
| j If we should usurp an authority which
we do not hold, we should render ourselves cupa-
BILE of the most aboninable abuse of our holy minis
try before the tribunal of God and before the en-
tire Church. Your Majesty even, in his Justice,
would not like to see US pronounce judgment con-
trary to the concctions Of conscience, and to the
invariable principles of the Church.
ltwas OF little account as to the marriage contract
ed in 1903 by the citizen Jerome BOnaparte, that
this marriage was later on, contrary to the polti
cal ambition of the Emperor of the French.
The following is the reply of the Prince Napo-
leon:
''The note of NJ. Jerome Bonaparte patterson
seeks to obscure by inexact insinuations and in
complete citations, question of civil law which
has been dGtnHiceiy and sovereignty decided by
| competent authorities. The marriage of the
| Prince jerome with Miss Paterson did not present
any of the characters of validity required by the
provisions of the French law. This union, con-
tracted IN a foreign country by young officer of
10 years, without the authorization of his military
chiefs, without the authorization of the head of
his family, who was also the head of the State
without the consent OF his mother, and without
the publication of the bans in his country was fol-
lowed, as soon as the event was known in France
by an authentic protestatiOn the part of his
mother, dated Sd Ventose, year Kill, in which it
is said. That the appellant, in order that her in
hnnld hat 4
may not be interpreted in a sense contrary to her
real sentiments in order to express her opinion on
the offence which her has committed against
the laws and maternal dignity-Declares, l. That
her consent was never demanded by her son minor,
and that she should have refused for motives
which the law does not authorize her to expose; 2
That she protests soemny by the present act
against any marriage contracted By her son Je
rome BOnaparte in a foreign country, without her
consent, and in opposition to the forms demanded
by the law; 3, That she to herself the
right to oceed against the act before the proper
tribunal as soon she shall procure transcript
the act OF ceremony, in order to have its nuty
declared"
The decree by which the nullity of the marriage
of NJ, Jerome Bonaparte with Miss Paterson wa.
affirmed emanated from Napoleon l., and is thu!
worded:
"PALAcE OF THE TUILERIEs, March 2, 1905.
NAPOLEON, Emperor of the French
In view of the act received by RAGUIDEAU, Notary
at Paris, the Sd Ventose, Year KILL, containing
protestatlon of Madame our mother against th
, pretended marriage of her son minor JEROME Bo
D NAPARTE, contracted in foreign country, witbou
the consent of his mother, and without publishing
8 the bans in the place of his domicil;
In view of articles 3. section l, and |, section 2
of the law of the goth Sept, 1892, the articles 63
las, 1885, l68, 10, III, and 1S3 of the civil code an
the Senatus- Consultum of the 2Sth Forial yea
=, Kill;
The Council of State having been heard:
!, Considering that the marriage of minor, con
tracted in foreign country, without public notice
and without the consent of his father and mother
is null, according to the French laws; that it
within the power of the chief of the State to inter
fere or to repress everything which may woun
his personal dignity or offend the majesty of tn
, throne;
: ARTICLE l. prohibition to all officers of tn
- civil law of the Empire to consign to their regis
: ters transcription of the act of ceremony of
pretended marriage which NJ. JEROME BoNAPART
should have contracted in a foreign country.
g ART. 2. The present decree shall be inserted il
d the Bulletin des Lois, and the Grand Judge, Minis
y ter of Justice, is charged with its execution.
More recently the question of the validity of tn
4 marriage has been revived upon the application
their Imperial Hghnesses, Prince Napoleon and tn
e Princess Mathide, for law prohibiting Mr.. Bona
o parte, of Baltimore, from attributing to himsel
$ with the of Bonaparte, "a fation whic
e ''cannot belong to him legally" Mr.. Bonaparte
J represented by NJ Berryer, demanded, on the cor
trary, "that all the rights, names and qualities of
= 'egitimate should be recognized" The Famil
Council, the 4th of July, 1856, gave judgment
It follows:
d CATER having heard the report of his EXcellency
}. the Guard of the Seals, Minister of Justice:
t, After having heard, also, the arguments of
IF Alon, Advocate of their Imperial Hghnesses, th
D. Prince Napoleon and the Princess Mathilde, and
s. NJ. Berryer, advocate of NJ. Jerome BOnaparte:
IT Considering that the demand brought before tf
Family Council by their Highnesses, the Primo
j. Napoleon and the Princess Mathilde, has for obiet
IN to take from NJ. jerome Bonaparte, son of Madam
t. Paterson the right to bear the name of Bonapar
D. and to claim any of the rights belonging to tf
re- members of the Bonaparte family:
o. Considering that on this double object it must /
n admitted that the decree of the I'd of March, $50
~ rendered null and void, in regard to chdre
ne born or to be born the marriage contracted in S(
n by the Prince Jerome, then minor:
v That we cannot contest the authority of tn
d sovereign Decree and on the faith of which anoth
or marriage was contracted:
g., Considering that it does not result from the fac
I and circumstances OF the cause, that the defendar
- has the right to take advantage of Articles 20l
~ ~ 202 of the Code Napoleon;
- But, considering that the said defendant b.
r constantly, since his birth, borne the name
" Bonaparte;
That this name has been given to him in
certificate of birth and of baptism, in all the ac
of civil life in his relations with the world and
III fine, by all the members of the Imperial family;
'st That, in such situation, no one can take fro
p him the right to continue to use name which
X never been denied him;