HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0128 and id is 1 raw text is: SWIFT V. SWIFT [1835]
in so nefarious a scheme, and their supporting it by the foulest perjury? Why
should each of these persons put their [301] existence in the power of the other
two, for nothing but to oblige Mr. Swift, whom they had never seen before the
12th of March? It is suggested that zealous Catholics will do. much, and strain
renany points, to gain over converts to their Church. But this supposition only
makes against the respondent, for it shows that the Abb6 would be the more careful
that all the necessary acts should be rigorously performed; and this assumes that
the abjuration and marriage should be duly solemnized. Pressed by this con-
sideration, and aware how hopeless it was to expect any one should believe all those
witnesses perjured, the respondent's counsel have recourse to the mixed and
wholly arbitrary and gratuitous supposition that the three witnesses were at first
deceived by Mr. Swift, and believed in a marriage having been intended by both
parties; but that they afterwards joined him in celebrating a fraudulent one.
This, no doubt, gets rid of the difficulty raised by the manifest want of motive
in the parties to lend themselves to commit a heinous -and perilous crime: but it
only relieves the case of this difficulty for a time, the same obstacle occurs at the
tactunt itself; for nobody can believe that the Abb6 supposed lie was receiving an
abjuration, giving absolution, and celebrating a marriage, without knowing that
all the while the parties neither abjured, nor confessed, nor assented to the nuptials:
therefore, they are fain to tack on a second supposition upon the first, and to say
that the witnesses were quite innocent up to Miss Kelly's entering the room, for
which she had just quitted her mother's company; knew nothing till that moment
of Mr. Swift's plot; but that they instantly became, as if by magic, partners in
it, and both married a person who knew nothing of the matter, and perjured them-
selves afterwards in [302] order to prove the marriage as well as the abjuration.
There is nothing within many degrees of this hypothesis in point of improbability
to be met with throughout the whole of the case. Upon the whole, then, we have
no doubt of the marriage, as well as the abjuration, having been performed with
the knowledge of both the parties, and that, therefore, the second ground of the
judgment fails as entirely as the first.
Such being our opinion, there is no occasion whatever for entering into the
remaining point of cohabitation; and it is a question from which, from obvious
reasons, one would desire to withdraw, unless forced to discuss it. The parties are
now by the effect of our judgment to be declared united in lawful wedlock; and,
therefore, it is altogether desirable to refrain from any investigation which might
lead in its results to embitter their lot, now united for life. But a regard to the
due administration of justice ajnd to public morals, will not permit us to be silent
upon one matter connected with this branch of the case. The conduct of one or
other of these parties in asserting or denying the, facts to which we are generally
alluding, must be guilty indeed. We abstain from dwelling on the particulars, but
this much it becomes us to observe.
The judgment below is reversed, the prayer of the suit is decreed for, and the
respondent is directed to receive the appellant as her lawful husband, and demean
herself towards him with conjugal fidelity and affection. I may mention that a
noble and learned friend of mine, who has read these arguments and observations,
with whom I have conferred upon the subject, and who once held the great seal,
entirely concurs in the judgment, nor have we entertained the slightest doubt upon
this occasion.
[303] ARCHES COURT OF CANTERBURY.
SWIFT v. SWIFT * [May 9, 22, 23, 24, 25, June 15, 24, July 9, 1833].
A marriage celebrated at Rome between two persons, Protestants; but who, it
No report having appeared of the decision of this Case in the Arches Court, it
has been thought advisable to give a report of this judgment, which contains much
evidence not set out in the previous report.
664
III KNAPP, 301](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0128&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)