APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 263 



at Bombay 42 years: every mar- 

 riage is registered at the church, 

 and copies are regularly trans- 

 mitted to England, after they are 

 compared from the original regis- 

 ter book, signed by the clergy- 

 man. The prisoner was married 

 to James Thos. Hacket Wilkins, 

 by him, on the 26th of January, 

 1810. They left Bombay soon 

 afterwards. Witness had not 

 seen the prisoner until he had an 

 interview with her in Bristol 

 gaol, where she was confined for 

 want of sureties to keep the 

 peace against Mr. Walton's 

 mother. This was about three 

 weeks ago. He knew the prisoner 

 well at this interview, notwith- 

 standing the length of time which 

 had elapsed since the marriage at 

 Bombay, owing to the celebrity 

 of her character, and the obser- 

 vations he made at the time as to 

 her person. This was further 

 corroborated from the conver- 

 sation he held with the prisoner 

 at that time, when she recog- 

 nized him. Thei-e were no sub- 

 scribing witnesses to the marriage 

 at Bombay, which was by licence. 



Mr. Winter, the parish- clerk 

 of St. Peter's, Lewes, produced 

 the register of the marriage at 

 that parish - church, namely, 

 *' Robert Baron Walton, of the 

 parish of Brighton, and Maria 

 Cox, of the parish of Lewes, by 

 licence, 28th May, 1816." The 

 witness was present at the solem- 

 nization. 



Mrs. Brierly, of the Pelham 

 Arms, Lewes, was also present at 

 the marriage. 



Mr. Bampfield, surgeon, of 

 Bedford-street, Covent - garden, 

 knew the prisoner, and lier de- 

 ceased husband, Mr. Cox, in 



Bombay, and subsequently her 

 secondhusband, Mr. Wilkins, who 

 introduced the prisoner to him as 

 his wife. They resided at Bom- 

 bay till June, 1809, when they 

 sailed for England. Witness left 

 India in the same fleet, and since 

 their arrival in England witness 

 often corresponded with Mr. 

 Wilkins, and who was now at 

 Horsham. 



Mr. Yates, clerk to Mr. Evans, 

 solicitor to the prosecution, 

 proved the acknowledgment of 

 the prisoner, that she was married 

 to Mr. Walton, whilst Mr. Wil- 

 kins was living. 



Here the case for the prosecu- 

 tion closed. 



The Common Sergeantand Mr- 

 Chitty then submitted two objec- 

 tions to the form of the indict- 

 ment: — 1st. That there was not 

 a sufficient venue set out as to the 

 first marriage stated in the indict- 

 ment, inasmuch as it simply said 

 " at Bombay, in the East Indies," 

 whereas it ought to have gone on 

 with a scilicet " to wit, at Cheap- 

 side in the city of London," in the 

 usual form, so as to give the 



Court jurisdiction. 2nd. That 



there was a variance between the 

 indictment and the registry of the 

 second marriage. In the former 

 it stated the marriage to have 

 been celebrated " at the parish of 

 St. Peter and St. Mary," whereas 

 the registry described the parish 

 to be St. Peter's {with an s) and 

 St. Mary. These objections, they 

 submitted, were fatal to the in- 

 dictment. 



Mr. Baron Graham thought 

 the objections not tenable, and 

 they were consequently over- 

 ruled. 



The prisoner being called upon 



for 



