The Fairfield herald. [volume] (Winnsboro, S.C.) 1849-1876, 1867-09-04
The Yelyerton Marriage Case,

| NO person can read the conclusion o
the hnal appeal to the House OF Lords
IN the case OF Mrs. Yelvcrton, wi,hou
Indignation at the decision that the Law
Lords have come against well cduca
ted lady, whose whole course of life wa.
rieproaclable from first to last, aud
who was so acknowledged by Mr.. Vel.
| verton as his wife that both in Scot
land and in Ireland tho legality Of The
hrst marriage was declared in th.o lower
courts IN her favor. 1t was even prov.
ed that Mr. Yclvcrton met her in the
best society, during tho Crimean war
when she volunteered as one Of Miss
Nlgh'lnSalc's assistants. They were
publicly considered engaged. There
was q pro(esscd marriage which sho
mover doubted to be real, and ccclos,as-
tlcalIy supposed TO be perfect by the
laws OF the Catholic Church, to which
she belonged. But he, being Pl cs.
taht, the marriage was held not to bind
hun, although he lived with her public
~ as his vile, and introduced her as
such everywhere. Even when brought
to the Committee Of the House Of Lords,
three OF The Law Lords were in favor Of
affirming the judgment Of the court be.
low, and pronouncing tho marriage valid,
while three were OF the opposite opin-
io1. Lord Brougham, however, having
lallcd to write out his opinion, the ma.
]orlty OF written judgments carried The
day. 1t was even shown that ono or
two Of those whose decisions were ad.
verse were no, unprecedented, having
previously given adverse judgments in
courts below.
But it was found that, by ancient
Scottish usage, ono Of the parties might
refer the cause Of the oath to the other,
when the party thus tending the refer
ence is unable to adducc proof OF the
facts alleged, and to this tho injured
woman wished to challenge her husband
Major Yclvorton. But this is now for
mally denied her, because by that oath
Mrs. Forbes (,he lady afterwards mar
riod by hin) might Oc deprived of her
statns as wife, and second, because an
answer in tho affirmative, which she
expected to receive, necessarily involved
an admission by the respondent of Grim
mallt,y--a confession Of bigamy. Or, if
he refused to make answer under oath,
the facts, and Mrs Forbes woNid navo5
boon conclusively deprived of all The
rights which she had acquired by her
marriage with the respondent. The
House Of LORDS concurrel in this, as n
final Judgment III the case, and the first
married is now Mrs. Yclvcrton no
more, but Miss Longworth by British
law.
1t seems to us that The aristocratic
prcjudc"s Of the British House OF Peers
had 10 little TO do with this final iudg.
mcnt upon Scotch law. Young noble
men often marry from love persons III.
ferior in rank and fortune. This was
esteemed such case. Vile and dsrc.
pntablo as the man was, and though
Mrs. Forbes and her friends, we suppose
must have known of the former alliance,
yet as she probably stood higher, or had
brought fortune-at any rate, as the
only way Of saving him from the charge
Of bigamy-thc Lords, to project arls-
tocracy and give preference to a
Church Of Of England over Catholic
marriage, havo turned the balance Of
la against that Of substantial Justice.
Philadelphia Ledger.