Marriage by Cohabitation and Acknowledgment. – Circumstances in which the marriage was held complete.
This was a declarator of marriage and adherence, brought by the respondent, Helen Inglis, against the appellant, Alexander Robertson, setting forth that he, Robertson, had in 1769, made his addresses to her,-that he had urged her to be his wife, which, after some solicitation, she agreed to, and soon thereafter he fitted up a house for her,-that she, the pursuer, thereafter became desirous of being formally married by a clergyman, but he told her that this was not necessary, and that they were really man and wife, and that the ceremony would only give publicity to a thing which he wished concealed from his father and mother. That, in order to satisfy her, he wrote out and delivered to her a contract of marriage, which he afterwards abstracted from her repositories,-that, in virtue of these solicitations, and on the faith of these assurances, they cohabited together, and lived and resided in the house above mentioned as man and wife, from the year 1769 to 1783, during which time he behaved himself to her in all respects as a husband would do to his wife, by providing the necessaries of life, and by owning and acknowledging her as such; and she was owned and acknowledged as his wife, by the minister of the parish where he resided, and by the whole neighbourhood. That by the ten letters produced, he acknowledges her as his dear wife, and subscribed himself her affectionate and loving husband. The action was thus founded on three grounds, 1. Promise with subsequent copula. 2. Habit and repute; and, 3. Acknowledgment of marriage. In addition to these facts, the house in which they lived had been bought on her account. She was originally a servant, but, preparatory to marriage, he sent her to board, and for her education. On that event, he had given her an annuity of andpound;50 per annum, in case of his predecease. When latterly he fell off in 1783, and proposed marriage to another female, Miss Brown, and this marriage was to be celebrated by a clergyman, none of the clergymen about the place would perform the ceremony, so public was the repute of their being man and wife; and Miss Brown and he had to get married by acknowledging, and going to bed before two witnesses, taking protest in the hands of a notary. In defence, the marriage was denied, and on proof being allowed, and taken on the import of the proof, the appellant contended that she had failed in establishing any of the three grounds of her action.
Citations:
[1787] UKHL 3 – Paton – 53
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Scotland
Family
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.581014