1841. July 22nd. SPARROW against HARRISON, willingly give her perfect freedom from it if he could. He afterwards added, "There is a way, Jane, by which you may obtain freedom;" then she said, "You mean the marriage never having been consummated:" he replied, "You are right, it never has." He said that he had considered the subject much, and had taken several opinions (of what kind I do not know). "In our case," he said," medical opinions are necessary;" and he added, that it was a delicate matter, and she had better consult her own friend who was her legal adviser; that the highest legal authority, that of an Ecclesiastical Court, I remember, he said, was requisite ; that it was a very delicate matter for her to enter upon, and she had better put her case into the hands of her friend, her legal adviser. The interview lasted for an hour, or nearly as much, as I recollect. In what he said, respecting another person's child being the same to him as his own, I did not understand him to mean anything more than the adoption, on her part, of a child for her own happiness. Report of Sir CHARLES MANSFIELD CLARKE, Bart., CHARLES "The signs of virginity are in many instances inconclusive. In the present case there are no positive proofs of connection having ever taken place, or the contrary; but there are decidedly no physical impediments to sexual intercourse. "CHARLES M. CLARKE, M.D. "CHARLES Locock, M.D. "6 London, 23rd June, 1841." Upon this evidence the cause came on for hearing. Addams and Curteis, for the alleged wife,—submitted that there was sufficient proof, of the nonconsummation of the marriage, and of the inability of Mr. Harrison, and referred to the cases of Mor ris v. Morris, (a) Greenstreet v. Cumyns, (b) Pollard v. Wybourne. (c) 1841. July 22nd. No counsel or proctor appeared for Mr. Har- SPARROW rison. against HARRISON. JUDGMENT. DR. LUSHINGTON. In cases of this description, the Court has generally considerable difficulty, and I have felt that this case is not without some embarrassment. The certificate does not much assist the case; it affords no proof whether there has been connexion or not; but it is not wholly unimportant, it states that there is no impediment on the part of the lady; but the true question is, whether there has been a triennial cohabitation and no sexual intercourse?— I think there has been sufficient cohabitation to satisfy the expression triennial cohabitation within the meaning of the law. If that be so, the question is, am I or am I not to believe the answers of Mr. Harrison? I see no reason whatever for disbelieving his answers, and they are supported by the evidence of Mrs. Dolphin. I have examined the case very carefully, and am satisfied that there is no collusion; and if there be no collusion, taking the evidence to be true, I think I am justified upon the whole, in pronouncing the libel proved, and in declaring the marriage null and void. The Court pronounced the marriage null and void, and condemned Mr. Harrison in the costs. (a) Not reported. (c) 1 Hagg. E. R. 725. (b) 2 Cons. R. 332; S. C. 2 Phill. 10. PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY. 1842. Jan. 15th. Administration with will an non granted to of a sister, the deceased, for the use and benefit of the kin, during her In the Goods of the REV. WILLIAM SOUTHMEAD, deceased. Motion. William Southmead died on the 25th of Decemnexed de bonis ber, 1832, a bachelor, without a parent, leaving a the executors brother, since deceased, and two sisters, Judith and administratrix, Charlotte Southmead, his only next of kin. He left a will dated 24th of July, 1792, by which he surviving sister, gave the residue of his property to his mother, the sole next of and appointed her sole executrix; she died in the imbecility, lifetime of the testator. In February, 1833, adwithout citing her next of kin, ministration with the will annexed was granted to Judith Southmead, who died in August, 1841, leaving part of the goods of the deceased unadministered; she left a will, and appointed executors. Charlotte Southmead, the surviving sister, and the only next of kin of the deceased, labouring under imbecility of mind, and being wholly incapable to take the administration or to renounce, Addams prayed administration with the will annexed of the unadministered effects of William Southmead, deceased, to be granted to the executors of Judith Southmead for the use and benefit 1842. Jan. 15th. of Charlotte Southmead, during her incapacity, without citing her next of kin, who were thirty in number and resident in various places, some in In the Goods of America. SIR HERBERT JENNER FUST. Under the circumstances of this case, the Court may, I think, dispense with the citation, and grant the administration as prayed; the grant of this administration being in the discretion of the Court, no party being of right entitled to it; although had one of the next of kin of Charlotte Southmead applied for the administration, the Court would have granted it. Every circumstance is as favorable as can be to this grant passing; a considerable part of the property of Judith Southmead is left to her executors for the benefit of this imbecile person during her life at their discretion, and who are entitled to a part of the property of William Southmead, the deceased, in this case. SOUTHMEAD, deceased. In the Goods of WILLIAM CARVER, deceased. Motion. 1842. Jan. 15th. a Testator signed by his name at the bottom of a The deceased, late of Charlton, in Kent, left will dated the 19th of October, 1841, signed him in the presence of two witnesses who attested it. The will was written on a printed form, and a sheet of printed form, ending on the second side of paper, the will itself ending on the first side. Probate allowed to pass of the will as signed at the "foot or end thereof." 1842. Jan. 15th. CARVER, ended on the first sheet of the paper, where there was not room for the testator's signature and that In the Goods of of the witnesses, and the testator, instead of signing his name at the top of the next page, wrote it at the end of the printed form, where the testator's signature was directed to be made by the instructions in the margin of the paper. deceased. Addams submitted that this might be considered a signing at the foot or end of the will, and prayed probate. SIR HERBERT JENNER FUST. The deceased seems to have written this will upon a printed form with great care; the will is divided into paragraphs, and the deceased looking, it should seem, to the instructions in the margin signed his name to the last paragraph of the printed form, supposing that to be the proper place; the more correct way would have been to put the signature where the will itself ends; but I am inclined to think that this may be considered a signing at the foot or end of the will, under the statute. Probate to pass. |