Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1861-02-21
Correspondence Of the London express,
The Ronapnrte Family suite.
PARIs, Friday Evening, Jan.

spoke for four hours and half without
moments interruption. speak literally;
the Court did not rise for refreshment until
he had done at about 81 o'clock. I came
away with great regret In the midst Of n.
Allou's speech for Prince Napoleon, in order
to seud you these hurried lines by this even
ing's post
/ must assume that by the publications
made in London you are already familiar with
the leading facts of the case, and in at empt-
ing TO give g sketch Of the tenor Of the ar
guments used to- day shall touch principally
upon those points which prior statements
seem 70 leave in need Of explanation. may
at once say that the question whether Jerome
BOnaparte, when he married Miss Patterson
was IS or %, is admitted on both sides to be
unimportant. 1t is clear that the new law
OF March, 1903, which altered the provisions
Of that of 1892, was known in the United
States at the time of bis marriage, that be
was bound by the new law, and was even
affected by express notice Of il given him by
N. Pichon, then the French Charged Afqirt5
az Washington, who did his utmost TO prevent
the marriage from taking place. Il is equal
IL clear that by tbs new law be was q minor
so long as be was ander the age Of %, and
that bis marriage as = French subject could
not regularly be solemnized without the con-
sent Of his surviving parent Madame Letizia
Bonaparte), which consent n. Berger ad-
mits there is no proof that he ever obtained.
The new law also provided that a marriage
of French subject abroad should be prece-
ded By the publication Of bans in France,
and that it is admitted, was not done in the
present case. The two great questions are
1. Whether the marriage was void CT only
yoidable; and 2. SuppOsing il to be voidable
only, whether theprotest against the marriage
which Madame Letizia Bonaparte was made
to sign by Napoleon L was good in form, as
being a reclamation in the sense Of the code
and made in time in accordance with the
provision that it should be made "Within
/ twelve months" of the time when the parties
whose consent was requisite for a regular
marriage, and ''had knowledge" of the fact
Of the marriage having taken place. am
disposed to think, judging from the tenor of
/ the commencement Of N. Allous speech,
that be himself will not, as q lawyer, lay any
great stress upon the various shameful and
selfeontradictory devices which Napoleon /.
resorted 70 in order to have the marriage an
nulled both civilly and religiously. The as
sumption in the defendants written plead
ings, that the matter has been decided by
sovereign power" may, | already feel per-
suaded, be dismissed, as NJ Berryer dismisses
it, as iidle and deVisory." The true ques-
IONS I repeat, are: l. Whether the mar
riage was void OBJ initio; and 2. Whether,
supposing it TO be only voidable, it was avoid
ed, in legal form and in proper time.
The Court to-day was as full as it could
I LII 4 =
places had been given by the President but a
considerable space was left, when the doors
we're opened, for rush by young barristers
and the general public. There was no at
tempt to pack the audience, and many who
had the patience to wait two or three hours
at the door for admission, met with the re.
ward which they deserved. The proceeding;
were opened by NJ. Legrand, GsOue for Mrs
Elizabeth Patterson, presenting the following
conclusions:
That it may please the tribunal to declare
the marriage contracted on Dec. "a, 1903, be.
tween the late Prince Jerome and Elizabeth
Patterson, valid.
And also to take Judicial cognisanet
(dopner aets) that N. Bonaparte, while de
manding that the marriage of Dec. "a, 1903
may be declared valid, has never had any in
tention to contest and does not now contest
the civil and political effects OF the union con
tracted in 1907 by his father with the Princes
Catherine of WurIemburg."
N. BerTTyer, in his exordium, said:
"The high authority Of Justice, who's
majesty should everywhere, and always, b
respected, is a guarantee that will introduce
no matter foreign to the cause. The crowd
ed state of the court is to me a warning that
far from seeking to crafty vain curiosity,
must confne myself to the strict discussion O
: the legal question will abridge as far a
, possible the statements already before you il
= my written memorial memorial not pub
Iished prematurely or containing statement
which can possibly be contested. This wa
! in answer to e recent paragraph in the Nom
! teur. Ny client Madame Patterson, the di
: vorced wife and now the widow Of the lat
Prince Jerome Napoleon, has waited nearl
sixty ysars foF tais day, and new, faithful t
the conduct from which she has nevs
0 swerved, she crosses the Atlantic at the az
4 of IS, and is here before you TO ask the just
: ice Of French court. In recapitulating tn
facts Of the case as stated in the memorial, n
: Berger dWelt at great length upon thereccg
8 milton of N. Bonaparte By all the Imperii
family during long series of years as the
: relation, arguing from this fact that notorietI
: in accordance with the register of his bapGsI
t was, in the terms of the Code, indisputab
r evidence of his status as a legitimate child
: He exposed the aagrant contradiction of th
5 Imperial proceedings in pretending to juds
: by a family council IA special tribnna
e which conlessedly had no jurisdiction, excel
over members Of the Imperial kmily-thi
/ Al BonapaFte was no member Of it. He Il
IS bored at great length to show that the ma
d riage in question, although objected TO at Il
IS time by the French Charge 9A6arss, WI
IS not "clandestine," nor made Gin fraud
> the French law;" that it was only voidab
r for want of proper publications and the lni
1t ternal consent; that no legal step was ev
i taken 10 set the marriage aside, and that Il
> first Napoleon's desperate attempt TO treat q
n marriage as Eoid-his repeated DEGREES, col
y tanning implied admissions that all his form
D acts against the marriage had been inefic
q cious-his correspondence with the Pop
le who refused to annul the marriage--and
= rejection of the legal opinion Of the Arc
y Chancellor Cambaceres whose advice
Sc asked: all showed the knowledge Of Nap
70 leon I. that nothing but judicial decision
- Wllcu II was now 100 AAsc 70 ASA AOL--SoA
p set the marriage aside. he concluded by e
r pressing his belief that the judgment Of {
m Court would confirm him N that respect
p the bench which he had cherished through
Sc long life"
n. Allou-a fluent and very good speak,
rs and first-rate advocate, although compal
of lively little knoWn-opened the case
ng Prince Napoleon. He was bold enough
a. say that the eloquent advocate opposed
re him had ve-y little hopes Of winning
ht cause. The case was overlaid with roman
lia which, from the lapse Of time, it was dific
.tb to reiute. While speaking most respectful
G. Of Miss Patterson and her family, he col
les not help saying the facts Of the case bore {
nd the statement to be found in history, that s
nd said If can be his wife but for an hOu
ill will run the riskp She knew of the LEI
a objections to the marriage e--tbe settlemC
En provided for ths case Of its being dissolv