MARRIAGE AND NO MARRIAGE.

Waikato Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 2262, 8 January 1887, Page 2

MARRIAGE AND NO MARRIAGE.

The Sebright in in ia,;e case forms a very -inarkable addition to the annals of "iglish jurisprudence. Mr Justice Butt'e ' cision was of great importance, both •-O.TI the legal and social points of view } ml, while everyone hoped for it, few, •rohahly. would hive been surprised had 'i« lordship «siid tint there were serious ■'bstacles in :he way of annulling the •inni;ige. But while we should jealously , >iud tin* marital bond, and should rather "■■k lo nirrow ihe facilities for divorce Man to I'Xfc'.-nd them, there were unques'onably in this onse circumstances of a ery UMii«ual and extraordinary nature. It may be said that there is no preciee precedent for the decision from the stri tly legal aspect; but then the case itself stands alone, and Mr Justice Butt Incidfsd to give the petitioner relief on the ground of the unique facts brought ■"fore him. Miss Scott, on coming of •ge in 1885, was entitled to a sum of f26,000. A month after she had attained !i«r majority. Sebright, the respondent, persuaded her to accept for his benefit a ■ill for £ 000. Other bills followed, until iiefore the close of the year she had been prevailed upon to accommodate her lover to the tune of £3 325. When the bills became due, and Sebright failed to meet them, the young lady's life was made % terror to her. She was served with writs, and threatened with bankruptcy. Having 'joncealed the matter from her mother and friends, she became almost frantic in view of her imagined social and financial ruin. In her deep distress, with shattered health and mind overstrung, she wrote pitiful letters to Mr Guedalla, a solioitor. beseeching him to I-eiid her the money to meet the bills, adding " For if I can't get it, you know, I must marry

him." The explanation of this phrase lay in the alleged fact that Sebright had threatened, if Miss Scott refused to marry, to accuse her in every drawingroom in London of having been seduced by him. Miss Scott's purity and innocence were established beyond suspicion, but it can be well understood that if such a threat were uttered it would have a terrible effect upon her. In any case, Sebright so repeatedly urged that there was no other way of relief for her, except by marrying him, that she went through the ceremony in a registry oflice in South Audley-street. But her free will was overmastered by threats ou tho respondent's part, which threw the petitioner into a state of terror and collapse. When the marriage ceremony •v.s over. Sebright told his unfortunate victim th-»t h« had got all he wanted, and they parted at the registry door, never to live toother as man and wife. Sebright went into the wit->ess-hox, relieved Miss Scott from th« odium of a disgraceful imputation ; but this seemi fo lm-« been the only occasion on which he muiif.-sti'd anv hurnmi fi-.-liny. Upoy

Hie eviilfnue ail-lnueil. the judge came to the eonchisinn t.ha' the petitioner had l>ij.»)i inveigled into marriage when she μ-is in a state of miuh »>o<lily and mental ■Miff-rinu that she was not t -i five agent, mi] could not- give such consent as the <=uv wfjdire.l for the making of a contract of marriaa*.'. Everybody must applaud this d. cision ; and if it has no exact precedent, Mr Justice Butt was, no •loubt, substantially right iu creating ono. The interests of the society and sanctity of the marriage bond did not require this mock union to be upholds and if thp marring Jiad b eel , p r onouuce4 gqod, a griovqus injury would, have b,een, dune to rhe petitioner. As the matter stands, no one hii* been wrouged. Mjsg Scott, has been relieved frqm a tje ab§ would never contracted had she been free to reject it ;the respondent has bren cx;io c eil ta the righteous contempt of his feUow-ineu.; and the justice had, been vindicated.—Lloyd's Nuwspaper,