APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 



203 



relatives and acquaintances of the 

 parties, Supported by the produc- 

 tion of an entry of the minor's 

 birth, made at liie time, in a fa- 

 mily Bible, the certificates of his 

 baptism and marriage, and the 

 original documents, authorising 

 the grant of the licence, in which 

 he was described as being above 

 the age of twenty-one. It was 

 likewise stated, that he is now a 

 prisoner upon a charge of bigamy, 

 founded upon the fact of his having 

 contracted a second marriage, sub- 

 sequent to the one in question; and 

 that he was more particularly de- 

 sirous of obtaininEC the sentence of 

 the court, as it would avail him so 

 materially in his defence. 



The defendant's counsel admit- 

 ted the sufficiency of the evidence 

 adduced to prove the facts of mi- 

 nority, marriage, and non-consent; 

 but relied upon it likewise to sus- 

 tain his objection, that there was a 

 failure of proof as to the plaintiff's 

 identity. 



Sir John Nicholl observed, that 

 the peculiar situation of the plain- 

 tiff, though perhaps not so distinct- 

 ly apparent from the evidence, as 

 to come within the judicial cogni- 

 zance of the court, was neverthe- 

 less sufficient to induce it to regard 

 the present proceeding with a very 

 jealous eye. If collusion was to be 

 suspected in any case, it was surely 

 in one like this ; the common dic- 

 tates of humanity were, in all pro- 

 bability, sufficient to induce the 

 lady against whom the present 

 proceeding was directed, to lend 

 herself towards facilitating its suc- 

 cess, great and painful as the sacri- 

 fice might be to herself. The 

 court must, therefore, come to the 

 consideration of the circumstances 

 of the case, impressed with the 



necessity of 8 rigid scrutiny, and 

 regard the proceeding as being 

 principally of an ex parte nature. 

 He then recapitulated the facts de- 

 tailed in evidence, and was of 

 opinion that the proof was un- 

 usually strong in support of them, 

 and that there was no foundation 

 for the objection to the proof of 

 identity : he therefore signed the 

 sentence declaratory of the invali- 

 dity of the marriage. 



MISCELLANEOUS CAUSES. 



Court of Kings Bench, Tuesday, 

 January l^. — Special Jury. — Le- 

 singham v. Fraser, and others.--- 

 This was an action for money had 

 and received brought by. the mas- 

 ter of Sir John Cass's school at 

 Aldgate, against his bankers, Mess, 

 the late Hon. Simon Fraser, Sir 

 John Perring, Bart, and Co. to re- 

 cover a sum of 82Z. \0s. alleged 

 to have been paid them on his ac- 

 count, by the plaintiff, and the 

 appearance of which, as a credit 

 to the plaintiff's account in the 

 bankers' books, was attributed by 

 them to a mistake. On the part 

 of the plaintiff was adduced tiie 

 evidence of two boys, of the ages 

 of 15 and 13, who in the year 

 1810, the time at which the sum 

 question was alleged to have 



m 



been paid, were the plaintiff's 

 scholars. Their names were Payne 

 and Lindc ; and Lord Elienbo- 

 rough observed, that the manner 

 in whic!) they gave their evidence 

 was so unembarrassed and straight 

 forward, as of itself to lead to no 

 suspicion that their story was not 

 true. They were perfect as to 

 their recollection of the 24tli of 

 March, having been the day on 



which 



