Volume 1

The trial of Elizabeth Duchess Dowager of Kingston for bigamy, before the Right Honourable the House of Peers, in Westminster-Hall, in full Parliament, on Monday the 15th, Tuesday the 16th, Friday the 19th, Saturday the 20th, and Monday the 22d of April, 1776. On the last of which days the said Elizabeth duchess dowager of Kingston was found guilty / Published by order of the House of Peers.

Elizabeth Pierrepont, Duchess of Kingston-upon-Hull

Date:: 1776

Credit: The trial of Elizabeth Duchess Dowager of Kingston for bigamy, before the Right Honourable the House of Peers, in Westminster-Hall, in full Parliament, on Monday the 15th, Tuesday the 16th, Friday the 19th, Saturday the 20th, and Monday the 22d of April, 1776. On the last of which days the said Elizabeth duchess dowager of Kingston was found guilty / Published by order of the House of Peers. Source: Wellcome Collection.

20/192 page 10

r I® ] But if it be offered as a Piece of Evidence for the Prifoner, fo that I muff admit or objedfc to it now, I fhall certainly infift upon going on with the Profecution, and drive this Article of Evidence into its own Place, the Prifoner’s Defence. There ic will be better been, how far it is available, or even competent* Unlefs I could learn the Purpofe of offering it from thofe who advifed it, I do not know how to make a more particular Anfwer to your Lordfhips Queffion. Duchefs of King ft on. Will your Lordfhips pleafe to permit my Counfel to be heard to this Point ? Lords. Ay, ay. Lord High Steward. Mr. Wallace, you may proceed for the Prifoner. Mr. Wallace. My Lords, I have the Plonour to be affigned one of the Counfel to advife and allift the noble Prifoner at the Bar in all Matters of Law that may arife in the Courfe of the Trial. I fhall fubmit with great Deference to your Lordfhips, that the prefent Stage of the Bu- finefs is the proper Seafon to introduce the Sentence which has been mentioned to the Court. My Lords, The Sentence is conceived to be conclufive upon the Fadt of that Marriage, which is the Ground of this Indidtment. The Indidhnent fuppofes that the Prifoner at the Bar was married to Augufius John Hervey: The Sentence now offered to your Lordfhips is not on y of a competent Jurifdiction to decide that Queftion, but the only conftitutional Jurifdidiion. My Lords, Whilff this Sentence remains unimpeached, I conceive that it is conclufive againft all Evidence to be produced of the Fadt of the Marriage. It is in that Light the Prifoner is advifed to offer it to your Lordfhips, that a Court of competent Jurifdidiion having decided the Point, it will be in vain to call parole Witneffes to the Fadl ; and it will only take up your Lordlhips Time, and it will be of no real Ufe to date the Evi¬ dence of Witneffes, which Witneffes cannot appear to give that Evidence before the Court. My Lords, The Office of a Counfel in opening the Cafe to any Court is, as I conceive, to ftate with Clearnefs the Evidence that is to be adduced, that the Court may better un- derftand and apply it : Therefoie, unlefs the Evidence is competent, your Lordfhips will not hear any State of it. This too perhaps may be the Time, though I fhall forbear at prefent to enter into it, to difculs whether the Sentence be admiflible; or, if admiflible, whether conclufive : But we are now, my Lords, upon the Order of producing this Sen¬ tence •, and if it has the Effebt, which I fhall humbly fubmit in a proper Seafon to your Lordfhips that it has, of being abfolutely conclufive, then the Evidence, which is now ready to be dated by the Counfel for the Profecution, ought not to be produced, and of Courfe ought not to be dated. This is the Light in which the Caufe appears to me at this Moment ; and I cruft your Lordfhips will concur in Opinion, that if the Sentence has the conclufive Effebt, which we are ready to fubmit to your Lordfhips it has, it repels all Tedimony, and makes it improper therefore to date any. If a Precedent ffiould be thought necefiary for what is prayed by the noble Prifoner at the Bar, I beg Leave to refer your Lordfhips to a Cafe determined at the Bar of the Court of King’s Bench in- the Reign of King William : It is reported in Mr. Serjeant Carthew*s Reports, 225, upon a Trial of an Ejeblment. The Queftion was, if Sir Robert Carr was abtually married to Ifa~ Bella Jones, by whom he had Iffue, and under whom the Plaintiff in that Caufe claimed the Edate. The Defendant, by way of Anticipation of the Evidence which the Plaintiff was about to give, moved the Court, that the Plaintiff ought not to be allowed to prove a Marriage between them, becaufe there was a Sentence in the Arches upon a Suit of Jactita¬ tion brought againd her ; by which it was decreed, that there was no Marriage between them, but that they were free from all Matrimonial Contracts and Efpoufals. The Sen¬ tence was then offered in Evidence by the Defendant’s Counfel at the Bar to conclude the Plaintiff from any Proof of the Marriage, unlefs he could fhew that the fame was repealed : And upon a Debate the Court were all of Opinion that this Sentence, whiid unrepealed, was conclufive againft all Matters precedent ; and that the Temporal Courts muft give Credit to ic, until it is rtverfed •, ic being a Matter of mere Spiritual Cognizance : And upon this the Plaintiff was nonfuited. Your Lordfhips may perceive that this Cafe is ap¬ plicable to another Part of the Bufinefs before your Lordlhips ; but I cite it now merely to fhew the Sentence was offered, and received to preclude the Examination of Witneffes ; and furely if Witneffes are not admiflible, their Teftimony ought not to be ftated. Mr. Attorney General. My Lords, I do not even now comprehend the Order of Pro¬ ceeding propofed. If

Licence and re-use

Contents

Volumes