Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 13.pdf/446

 London Legal Letter. Such a covenant was absolutely inviolable; and. with this knowledge of the meaning of the ceremony of the covenant, we can un

409

derstand the horror of the phrase so often used by the prophets in Israel, "Ye have broken the covenant of your fithers."

LONDON LEGAL LETTER. THE case of the divorce in Nevada and the Subsequent marriage in that State of Earl Russell, to which reference has been made in these columns before, has attracted a great deal of attention in this country within the last few days, owing to the arrest of Earl Russell on the charge of bigamy. At the hearing at the Bond street police station he was remanded to await the action of the grand jury which, day before yesterday, found a true bill against him. Instead of sending the case for trial at the Old Bailey, as would have been done had the indicted person been a commoner, the Recorder was obliged to remand the accused for trial by his peers in the House of Lords. As such trials are very infrequent every stage of the proceedings will be watched with curiosity. When the Lord Chancellor took his seat on the Wool-Sack yesterday afternoon, he announced that he had received the follow ing communication from the Recorder of London: "Central Criminal Court, City of London, June 25, i go i. "My Lord — I have the honour to inform vou that a true bill for bigamy has this day been returned into Court against John Francis Stanley, Earl Rus sell, a Peer of Parliament — bigamy being a felony. I have, in accordance with the practice hitherto pursued in such cases, enlarged the recognisances of the witnesses until the pleasure of the House of Lords is signified.— I have the honour to be your lordship's faithful sen-ant, "Forrest Fulton, Recorder of London. '• To the Right Honourable the Lord Chancellor."

A committee of the Lords was forthwith appointed, consisting of the Lord Chan cellor, the Earl of Morley, the Marquis of Salisbury, the Lord Chamberlain, 'Earls

JULY, 1901. Woldegrave and Spencer, and Lords Ribblesdale, MacXaughten, Morris, Davey, James, Brampton, Robertson, Lindley and Alverstone, to consider the proper methods of proceeding in order to bring the accused to a speedy trial. Of these eminent peers, one, the last named, is the Lord Chief Jus tice, and seven are law lords who are accus tomed to sit to hear appeals in the House. As every peer will have a right to sit as a judge in the case, and as each has the further right of making a speech before casting his vote, the proceedings may, if all the peers, of whom there are several hundred, avai! themselves of their privileges, be protractec to an interminable extent. It is not prob able, however, that any others than those who are accustomed to take part in the appeal cases will deliver judgments, al though all will be given an opportunity to vote. The prosecution of Earl Russell for bigamy has been taken up by the public prosecutor, who. to procure the necessaryevidence, sent an agent to Nevada, in which State Earl Russell obtained his divorce and subsequently married. In order to prove the marriage the judge of the second judicial district of Nevada, who married the parties, has been brought to London. He is the authority for the statement that the decree of divorce is invalid, although, presumably, he pronounced it himself. The statutes of Nevada provide that forty days shall elapse after the date of the last day of publication (where divorce is by publication) before a decree can be entered. In this case there was service by publication, and the last