About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Charles Patterson, Appellant, v. Edmund P. Gaines and Wife U.S. 550 (1848)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0294 and id is 1 raw text is: 550 SUPREME COURT. Patterson v. Gaines et ux. The West River. Bridge Company, Plaintiffs in error, V. The Towns of Brattleboro' and Duinmerston, in the County of Windham, and Joseph Dix, Asa Boyden, and Phineas Under- wood. This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Supreme Court of Judicature of the State of Vermont, and the Chancellor of the first Judicial Circuit of the said State of Vermont, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said Supreme Court of Judicature and Chancellor of the first Judicial Circuit of the State- of Vhnont in this cause b~e and the same is hereby affirmed, with costs. CHARLES PATTERsoN, ArrELLANT, v. EDMUND P. GAINES AND WIFE.* Te opinion of this court in the case of Gaines v. Relf and Chew, (2 Howard 619,) reviewed. A court of eqtiity can decide the question whether or not a party is the heir of a deceased person. It is not necessary to send the issue of fact to be tried by a court of law. Where a marriage took place in Pennsylvania, it must be proved by the laws of Pennsylvania. In that State it is a civil contract, to be completed by any words in the present tense, without regard to form. and every intendment is made in favor of legitimacy. Where the complainant in a bill offers to receive an answer without oath, and the defendant accordingly filed the answer without oath, denying the allegations of the bill, the complainant is not put to the necessity, according to the general rule, of contradicting the answer by the evidence of two witnesses or of one witness with corroborating circumstances. The answer, being without oath, is not evidence, and the usual rule does not apply. In this case, however, even if the answer had been under oath and had denied the allegations of the bill, yet there is sufficient matter in -the evidence of one wit- ness, sustained by corroborating circumstances, to support the bill. A marriage may be proved by any one who was present and can identify the parties. If the ceremony be performed by a person habited as a priest, and per verba de presenti, the person performing the ceremony must be presumed to have been a clergyman. If the fact of marriage be proved, nothing can impup the legitimacy of the issue, short of the proof of facts showing it to be impossible that the husband could be the father. By the laws of Louisiana ind Pennsylvania, a marriage between a woman and a man who had then anotheTr wife living was void, and the woman could marry again without waiting for a judicial sentence to be pronounced declaring the -marriage to be void. If she does so marry again, and the validity of her second marriage be contested, upon the ground that she was unable to contract it because the first marriage was legal, it is not necessary for her to produce the record of the conviction of * Mr. Chief Justice Taney did not sit in this cause, a near family relative being interested in the event. Mr. Justice McLean did not sit in this cause. Mr. JustiCe Catron did not sit-in this cause, by reason of indisposition.

What Is HeinOnline?

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.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most