AUSTRALIAN NEWS. THE STRANGE BIGAMY CASE IN SYDNEY.

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 354, 27 March 1889, Page 5

AUSTRALIAN NEWS. THE STRANGE BIGAMY CASE IN SYDNEY.

TV case in which Mrs Harriet Corsfcon stands charged with having married one William Green Hibble, ab Sydney, on July 21, 1886, her lawful husband being then alive, was resumed betore Mr Addison, S. AJ., at the Water Police Court, Sydney, Marr>n 15th. Mr Koberts, sen., appeared for the defence and Mr George Wallace for the prosecution. After tome argument, Mrs Gorston was again pub in the box and was examined at some length. She admitted that Hibble bad on more than one occasion sent her \\ ritten proposals of marriage, bub this was looked upon as annoying and insulting. These letters, however, had been stolen or lost, and all that she could say was that she had sent an answer distinctly declining the protlered 'olier, pointing out that his suit was anything but welcome. Hioble, in reply, wrote stating that his desire was to protect and not to insult her. Subsequently he •orwarded her an order for £50 Irom Sydney to Auckland, N.Z , to pay her passage to New South Wales. She accepted the advance conditionally and came over to this colony, but it was on the distinct undei standing that she should nob' be lece ved on ariival by the dolendant Hibble, but that she should be m t by his sister. That arrangement she considered bo be a pleasing and satisfactory one under bhe circumstances. Until her husband was suddenly confronted with her in an office in Pitt - street, Sydney, she had not sien him for a considerable period. She had known Hibble for about 20 years. On resuming acquaintanceship with him in Sydney he gave her a glowing account with respect to his financial status, nd also remaiked that he had been made a magistrate ol the colony. She replied that she was exceedingly glad to hear of his good luck and piosperity. Other communications and meetings took place and eventually she was married to h m. Befoie the ceremony the had made luither inquiries from various sources, which couhimed her in -her belief that her husband was actually dead, and on the strength of thac belie! she wrote to Hibble, -tating that she was now single and that a great load of doubb had been taken from her mind. She honestly and conscientiously believtd that her lawlul husband was dead, and she did not believe the i umour that he was ali> c. On January 31, 1887, the discovered in the pocket of her hu&band's overcoat, which r w«s hanging in the hall, a lawyers le'ter, which showed tiiab he felb a doubt as to her being a single woman. She felb extremely annoyed, insulted and piqued, and at once cut his connection, left the house and sepai'ated fiom him. The letber is as follows :—: — Wentworth Court, January 6, 1887. Mr W. J. HibDle, 40 Wilham-stieet, E. Rushcutter's Bay. Dear Sir,— At your request I send you the following advicG:— (l) As yo .do not appear to ue certain that the husband of the lady whom you lately married is alive, and as you were personally acquainted with him, I adwseyou to to Muluouviie and see if the Mr Brown taid to be Mi Uoistin is really he. It >ou flnu that this io a caso ot mistaken identity oi course you hay nothing further to do than to recall your uife irom New Zealand. But if you find that the said Mr Corslin is alive, 1 would advise you as loliows :— (2) That as Mrs Corstin, believing heroett to be your lawtul wite, relinquished her means of live lhood, you take steps to obtain tor her as lucrative as that which she has ten en up for your sa^e. (3) i .... (4) That in the meanwhile you supp, y Mrs Corstin with an income equal to that which she was earning at the time of your supposed marriage with her. (5) That it Mrs Oorstin w< re to obtain a divorce from Mr Corstir. in Amer.caor some foreign country, that divorce vvou d not be recognised by the laws ot this or such other British colony, unless the divorce were granted on such grounds as would suffice to sustain a peiilion lor divorce in this or such other British colony (6 That Mr Oorstin could probably geta dissolution ot mairiage with Mrs (Jorstiu it he \\ ere to petition on theground of her adultery w ith you, but that in such a suit al the oi cumstances ot the case would be published, and you, as co-respondent, wou'd be Jia'b a to be mulct in damages. (7) Thai MrsUorstin iain dangir ot pioseoution, and conviction' for bigamy at the instigation ot any outside person. \8) That you also run the risk ot such prosecution against you for bigamy ; but on the case set before me 1 think you would be acquitted, but of course tins would depend upon evidence. Thai, apart from a proper regard for morality, it is advisable that you and Mrs Coratin should retrain from cohabiting. A jury wou.d be unwjiling to give a verdict against either cf jou, and, if they should bring in a verdict of guilty of bigamy aaainst either of you, vvou d probably recommen each of jou to mercy, nnd the judge would probably pass a light seu.ence, and the Crown might grant a l ardon. (10) That, as a matter of business, since Mrs Corsiin has been stated to be your wite you should be at liberty, it you think it necessary, to giv special written notice to all the tradesmen to whom you inlro tuced her as your wile that you will not be liable tor debts nctirred by any person calling herse f your wife, tind should be at libeity to advertise m ihe public papers to that etiect, so that you will not be Lable tor debts ot such a person. I am, etc., (Signed) Alpkeß cr. G- bbes, Solicitor. She then rented a small house and lived apart horn her husband, bub subsequent y, through the intervention of a friend, they were temporarily reconciled. Hibble had on one qccasion told her that, her husband was alive, bub „he was, a convict m Pen bridge Gaol. , That statement she reI used to believe, and gave an indignant reply. When she saw her husband he was a stout, robust man, bub now, he' had, so much altered that she .couldn't possibly have identified; him, even if she had inejb* him in the street, without an introduction. Further evidence having been offered tha case was adjourned until Thursday, Majich 21. Bail was allowed. , {