258 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1816. 



parish of St. George, Hanover- 

 squaie, on the I'ith of October, 

 1812, the said Mary Usher, his 

 former wife, being then alive. 



Thomas le Gard Grissen, the 

 first witness, deposed, that he 

 was employed in the secretary's 

 office, in the India-house, and 

 now produced the book of the 

 registei" of marriages in the East 

 Indies. 



The Rev. Arnold Burrowes de- 

 posed, that he was chaplain to the 

 presidency of Bombay for 4*2 

 years. In the year 1794, he knew 

 Miss IMary Usher. He was also 

 acquainted with Captain Har- 

 n)\ver. Heard that the latter was 

 paying his addresses to the foimer, 

 and was applied to for the pur- 

 pose of perfoiming the marriage 

 ceremony between them. He did 

 not, however, do so ; but be- 

 lieved that the Rev. Mr. Owen, 

 the chaplain of Calcutta, then on 

 a visit to Bombay, did marry the 

 parties. Captain Harrower and 

 Miss Usher afterwards passed as 

 man and wife, and witness was 

 invited to an entertainment l)y 

 Captain Harrower, when Miss 

 Usher presided as his wife. This, 

 however, was not on the occasion 

 of their marriage. Witness never 

 heard of the separation of the 

 parties, until Captain Harrower 

 left India for Europe. ^Mtness 

 was in tlie iiabit of forwarding 

 copies of the registers of marriages 

 at Bombay home to the India- 

 house. 



. Tlie witness being referred to a 

 copy of a register, signed with 

 his own name, and certifying tliat 

 he had compared it with the ori- 

 g-inal reijister of the marriaire of 

 Captain Hari'ower and Miss Mary 

 Usher in February 1794, Mr. 



Alley, for the prisoner, obiccted 

 to the question, but the objection 

 was overruled by the court ; and 

 the clerk read from the register- 

 book, the copy of the marriage, 

 dated the " 5th of February, 

 1794, between George Harrower, 

 free mariner, to Miss Mary Usher, 

 spinster," certified, a true copy 

 of the parish registers of Bombay, 

 between the ]4th of February, 

 1773, and the Sth of November, 

 1799. — Signed, Arnold Burrowes. 



Mr. Alley contended, that tlie 

 certificate just read was not fram- 

 ed agi'eeably to the marriage act. 



Mr. Justice Abbott said, that 

 the act alluded to did not e.Ktend 

 to Bnmlay. 



jNIr. Alley now called upon the 

 coui.sel for tlie iirosecution to 

 prove that the ivgister, of vshich 

 the one put in professed to be a 

 copy, was drawn upin conformity 

 to the mairiage law of Bombay. 

 He argued further, that it should 

 be proved whether the marriage 

 had been celebrated by license or 

 banns. 



Mr. Serjeant Best, for the de- 

 fence, desired the witness, Mr. 

 Burrowes, to read over the entry, 

 and asked whether he had so com- 

 pared it with the oiiginal as to 

 swear to it? Witness would not 

 positively s vear to it, but he 

 firmly believed he had compared 

 all tlie entries to which his signa- 

 ture had been affixed, to be the 

 original registers of marriages. 



Re-examined by Mr. Guiney. — 

 AMtness was in the constant habit 

 of sending home by tlic East India 

 ships duplicate, triplicate, and 

 quadruplicate copies of the regis- 

 ters of such manias'es as took 

 ])lace in Bombay. 



Mr. Baron Richards (to the 



witness) 



