Swansea and Glamorgan Herald, and South Wales Free Press. — 1860-03-28 (Swansea, West Glamorgan, Wales)

EXTRAORDINARY CASE. —ln the Edinburgh Court of Session, on Friday se'nnight, Mrs. C. Mitchell, or Leslie, entered a suit to have it declared that she was a wife of the late Rev. Catehard Leslie, minister of the parish of Borthwick, near Edinburgh. In 1823 an attachment arose between the parties, and they entered in an engagement of marriage in December of that year. Mr. Leslie, who was a student in divinity, was then about 22 years of age, and the fact of the engagement of the parties tt as communicated by both of them to the pursuer's father in 1823, and was approved of by him. It was recommended that the marriage should be deferred till Mr. Leslie became a minister, lie became assistant to a minister in 1827, and in that year the two formally accepted of each other as husband and wife, but it was agreed to keep the marriage secret till he was placed in a church. There was no evidence of this alleged verbal contract, except in the change of the terms of their correspondence, wherein :Mr. Leslie invariably subscribed himself as the pursuer's husband, and the pursuer used the name and subscription of Catherine Leslie, and this they continued to do for 30 years, letters being interchanged between them at least weekly. Mr. Leslie occasionally made remittances to the pursuer, although these were limited, in consequence of his circumstances being very embarrassed. The letters were perfectly affectionate and intimate. It was not till July, 1846, that Mr. Leslie was presented to the church and parish of Bothwick, when the pursuer earnestly entreated him to take her home as his wife. This he professed himself unable to do in consequence of his pecuniary circumstances. Ultirnately,in May, 1856, the pressure of his debts, many of which were not creditably incurred, and which amounted to between £7,000 and £B,OOO, led him to a resolution to flee the country, and he committed suicide in Lancaster, while on his way to America or Australia. The Lord Ordinary (Ardmilan) decided that no marriage had been proved, notwithstanding the acknowledgements in the correspondence. The pursuer reclaimed against this judgment and the Court, on Friday, decided by a majority that the parties had been married according to the law of Scotland, which Lord Doss thus explained :—"The leading principle is that consent maketh marriage. No form or ceremony, civil or religious, no notice before nor publication after,  • no cohabitation, no writing, no witnesses even, are essential to the constitution of this, the most important contract which two private parties can enter into, whether as affecting their domestic arrangements or the pecuniary interests of themselves and their families. Matrimonial consent may be verbally and effectually interchanged when no third party is present; and if it can be proved, even at the distance of years, by subsequent written acknowledgment or oath of reference, or in any other competent way, that such consent had been seriously and deliberately given, the parties will be held to have been I married from that time forward, whether they have cohabited in the interval or not. Living together and being in habit and repute husband and wife will, in like manner, constitute marriage, without inquiry whether the parties meant it or not."