The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1861-03-08

The noble lord was explaining some why he'd
not acted IN the manner IN which the honorable ms@
NOT Hear hear.) Under these circumstances he
thought the noble lord was in order. (Hear, hear,
Lord J. RUSSELL said thst select committee Of tho
House had made certain recon- neudAticns. Upon those
recommendations u might have been hia duty 70 act
and he was venturng 70 explain 70 the House why he
did not consider prudent 20 lake any STOPS in the mat
ter He did not wish 70 eutsr tsrShsr into the argu
whole pox evOf this Oounryihear nesr1-sud
thought any minister Of the Crown ought be most
cautious before hs ook any step Of the kind suggested
(Heas, hear) ge.eiq.slts rt-lH 1920
81 The Benaparte-Patterson Case.
= c From the L0nden Aan lard, Feb. ISL
~ gHMggl. ra JUDGMENT.
"A the sitting Of the Tribunal Of the First Instance
the President, n Benoit Champy, delivered the
The ssibunai judging in tho nrst resort,
Considering the demand against H. l. II. Prince Napo
leon by Madame Patterson and j. BonAparte her SON.
haa for object tho liquidation and distribution Of the
1850;
the plant claim of legitimate wife and Of Prince Je
rome, with whom Madame Patterson Is alleged TO have
contracted marriage at Baltimore December a. 1908
Conaiderpg that among the grounds put forward AZ
defence 10 this action one founder the authority
Of Ia chose juq IA previous final decision that accord
Ions Of the family council on July T. 1856 AMI
July 8, 1860, which decisions admitted and proclaimed
the pulity Of the marriage Of Dec. "a, and Its eica
That II Ia proper, in the first place. to consider the
merits OF this ground Of defence, because IL 1t be well
present demand and relieves the tr ,unal from the
necessity OF examining the other questions raised in the
course OF the the marriage was void
tainted with candestiny whether Marianne Patterson
claim the benefit Of good faith In the legal accep
taton Of the term, and what authority Is due to the
DEGREES Of the 18th and goth ventose;
And finally. whether the possession deG (taus)
claimed by NJ. Barryers clients does not meet with
manifest energetic and continuous contradiction the
fart inf ho n
his Imperial Hghness Prince Jerome and the Process
Catherine Of Wuremburg the faith OF the legal
existence Of the fret union and whether therefore the
expressions importing used towards Jerome
Patterson In the do not dnd their natural
explanation the undoubtei ties Of blood which existed
aud cay So seeing that the recognition Of this
possession of would have been, the part of the ch
dren of the second marriage the negaton OF their own
Considering that by the terms OF article $50 OF the
Code Napoleon legal presumption especially connected
with the authority which the law attributes to the chose
That by the terms of article 351 Of the the
authority Of the chose gee prevails with regard TO that
which has been the subject of Judgment that the thing
demanded must be the same, and the demand must be
founded upon the same cause and between the
parties appearing In the Same character.
Considering that In order &c determine whether the
various conditions OF identity exist In the present cause
II Is necessary 70 examine mnuteIy inc circumstances
which gave rise to the discussion In the family council
well the conclusions taken before IL, and upon
which the judgments Of 4th july 1856, and 9th July
Considering that the marriage OF December a. 1908
contracted Baltimore between BoIaparte brother OF
the First Consul and Patterson was 1t IL true, cele
brsed ding to the forms and with the publicity re
CURED by the local statutes but that 1t is proved that
Jerome Bonapare then only nineteen, and that the
clauses OF the Code Napoleon relative to marriage had
been promulgated in the month Of March preceding.
That according to article Of the code the laws CON
corning the state and capacity Of Frenchmen govern
Frenchmen abroad and that, according to article 10,
two conditions were imposed to validate marriage con
tractcd by aFrenchman in foreign couatry-the publ
catiops prescribed by article G3, and the consent
Of the parents, in conformity with article l48nether OF
which conditions were complied with IN the present
case and carly October 1903 tho French Minister
in the United States notihed these legal disposition
Jerome BoDaparte and as0 to Mr. Patterson the father
and General smith near relation OF T. Patterson, and
that these notifications did have the effect OF breaking oil
the marriage In 1903.
That nevertheless he project of marriage sud
denly revived and realized December "a Of the same
That IL is even to be remarked that in tho contract
stipulation inserted by which Jerome Bonap1rte
detook any doubt should be raised 10 hs
validity Of the marriage eiher in the state Of Maryland
CT in France TO do and complete a acts necessary to re
difficulties, and TO make the union valid and
oct marriage according to the forms and laws both OF
Mary and France.
Considering that authentic protest OF Madame Mere
against tho aforesaid marriage, lated ventose year
KILL followed by two DEGREES Of the Emperor Napo
ION L. dated IL and 80 ventose OF the same year.
The first prohibiting all officers Of the civil from
ewing their registers the transcription OF the act Of
eeb alton Of the pretended marriage contracted by Prince
erome Bonaparte In n foreign country.
The second declaring that the said marriage was null
nd void, that II could never produce any civil effects,
that the born TO be born OF the
riage could never claim any right Of relationship founded
upon that union.
Considering that years later the marriage Of his
Imperial Righness Prince Jerome Bonaparte with tho
Princess Catherine Of Wurtemburg ceebr ated In
France with all the formaIties prescribed by law and
that January O. 1913, Madame K Patterson claimed
and obtained from the General Assembly OF Maryland an
act annuiDg To marriage which she had contracted In
1903 with Jerome Bonapafte;
Prince Napoleon and Princess Mahde his sister children
OF the marriage Of Jerome and the Princess Catherine Of
Wurtemburg, having learned that Patterson not only
assumed the Of Bonaparte but claimed to be leg
innate son. by virtue Of the marriage of December ~,
1903 brought action for the purpose OF establishing
that Patterson not entitled to exercise any OF tho
rights appetaning 10 the legitimate issue Of Prince Je
rome ana that he and his descendants might be prohibit
ed from using the Dame OF Bonapare, tho decree OF III
yentose remaining In full force
That the family council instituted by article % OF the
statute Of June n 1862 By virtue Of the senatu, Con-
petent to take cognzance OF this scton and that had
sovereign jurisdiction on The question.
That Jerome Patterson, NJ well In his own name A. In
that OF his recognizing the competence OF the family
couLc maintained that the marriage Of December -
sion dea following established his legitimacy In the
most perempory manner that subsdiariy he demanded
that In case the marriage should be declared void Il
might produce ts civil effects in virtue OF articles 20i
and 202 Of the Code Napoeon, O consequences Of
good faith AT least the presumptive good fsithof the
That upon these conclusions thus taken and developed
by MN Anou and Berger In the name Of the respective
parties, the family council decided on July a. 1850 that
OF Bonaparte by which he had always been known,
he had right 70 the benefit Of articles 20l and 2o2 OF
the code.
And this because did not appear from the facts and
circumstances OF the that the defendant had right
10 avail himself OF the aforesaid articles and because the
mnrrage 1909 hal been made null and void by the de
q IL and 30 ventose, KILL with regarj
20 children bern and ~ be born
Considering that u rs manifest that in refusing TO give
70 the marriage OF Dec o. 1905 the value aud effects Of
putatve mefrage, tie fsoiiy council necessarily AMI
fovfoTt recgnzed ad proclaimed the guilty OF taat
marriage
Considering v true hat this judgment Is not bialing
upon Mrs Patterson, who Sas PARTY n H. but TIN.
second judgment against both her ana her Jerome
Patterson authorized TO bear the aDeof Bpjapare
pronounced july 8, 1860 that an opposition 9
the removal OF tho seals after the death ~ Prince ~
having been formed by them rs claiming right
IN the succession, the family council invested with
cognzance q this difficulty; that the conc sons
presented behalf Of Prince Napoleon that II
might DO declared by the council that the opposition
VI founded
Considering that before the family council W. Berryers
clients pleeced that the council hal Jurisdiction 10 do
eide tie question and aagei that they light he sent
fa de rfre before the President ~ the Tribunal OF the
Fret Dstsnce Of the Seine but tht The council, after