Hide Articles List

9 articles on this Page

(Bpiloira of Ucfas.I

A CLERGYMAN SUSPENDED FOR…

A DISASTROUS OVERSIGHT.

LIFE IN A WORKHOUSE.

GREAT SACRIFICE OF PROPERTY.

XTRAORDINARY CHARGE OF BIGAMY.

News
Cite
Share

Mrs. Eliza Lumley, a fashionably-dressed lady, with the remains of considerable personal attractions, was brought before M.r. Tyrwhitt, at the Marlborough-street Police-court, en Wednesday, charged with unlawfully intermarrying with Major William Brownrigg Lumley, K.C.B., during the lifetime of her husband, Alexander Victor. Mr. Besley, in opening the case, said The lady before you is charged with a serious offence. It is with having, on the 9th July, 1847, married Major William Brownrigg Lumley. She described herself in the marriage certificate as Eliza Haines, of full age, spinster. The husband is described as a bachelor and gentleman, residing at Hampstead, and, by right of his father, Knight Commander of the Bath. The lady is also described as residing with her father, Thomas Haines, gentleman, Hampstead. On the day of this marriage we allege that bigamy was committed by the defendant. I shall prove that a previous marriage took place at St. Helier's, Jersey. I have a copy of the certifif ate here. It is in French. It has been compared with the parish register in the Channel Islands, they being within the diocese of Winchester. Haines, the father of the defendant and two other daughters, Georgina and Harriett, was a purser in the royal navy. Previous to the year 1836, the father and the young ladies were living at St. Helier's, and while there became acquainted with Victor, a teacher of the French language, who at the time of the marriage with the defendant was residing at St. Helier's. I will here just remark we have subpoenaed a witness who knew the de- fendant personally, who visited her before and after the marriage, and who can depose to cohabitation for some time. You will find, sir, that the defendant was in 1837 living with Victor, and calling him her husband, that she entered into partnership with Mrs. Wagener, and that in 1842 she was carrying on a school at Park- villas, Bristol. The school did not succeed, and an in-' solvency supervening, the defendant and her husband left Bristol, but before they did so I will prove that while living together as man and wife they were visited by the defendant's two sisters, and that the defendant always represented Victor to be her husband. I really do not knew how anything can be more conclusively shown than this marriage between the defendant and Victor, Here is the certificate, here we find the defendant's family visiting her, and the defendant herself admit- ting that Victor was her husband. After the in- solvency of the school, we next find Victor and his wife separated. I cannot give the exact date, but it was somewhere about the year 1842. I am given to under- stand a witness named Oliver will prove that after the separation she met Victor at Brighton in the year 1848. I must ask you to bear in mind that my evidence will fhow that Victor was alive in 1848, and following out the thread of my narrative, I shall show that the defen- dant resumed ner maiden name ef Haines, that she entered into communication with a lady named Brown, aunt of Major Lumley, relative to a situation, and that it was in consequence of these communications that an ac- quaintance with Major Lumley subsequently took place. In 1835 Major Lumley returned from India in a state of health, caused by the climate and military services, which required good medical attention and nursing. Major Lumley, as I am informed, nearly lost the sight of his eyes. Mrs. Brown was the means of introducing the defendant, who then went by the name of Eliza Haines the same lady married to Victor at Jersey, and who afterwards married Major Lumley. Major Lumley and his wife lived together many years, and up to March 1864, Major Lumley was ignorant that his wife had been previously married. In 1864 a separation took place an arrangement was come to and here, as I am anxious your worship should know every fact, I will state that my client desires to feet rid of this settlement, and I say there can be no discredit in any one wishing to get rid of a transfer of property effected by fraud, such as was the case with this settlement, Major Lumley at the time being kept in ignorance of a previous marriage. I have now stated the whole of the facts. It was by the merest accident that Major Lumley discovered that prior marriage existed. He did not find this out until two or three years after the deed of separa- tion was executed. He did not get possession of evi- dence until then that Victor was the husband of the defen- dant, who called herself spinster in 1848, and who thereby obtained the position of Major Lumley's wife. Mr. Tyrwhitt: Then there were 11 years between the marriage with Victor and the marriage with Major Lumley. Mr. Besley That is so. But in the interval, as late as 1842. I shall show that Victor and his wife cohabited together at Bristol. Evidence was then taken at some length in support of the statements in the I' opening speech of the learned counsel, and an adjourn- ment of the hearing took place t

iILmtium aitli Countrp ;fflarktts.

[No title]

--.... -------------_-__-------DESTRUCTIVE…