Commonwealth v. Kenney
| Decision Date | 19 June 1876 |
| Parties | Commonwealth v. Prince W. Kenney |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Barnstable. Indictment for polygamy. Trial in the Superior Court, be fore Brigham, C. J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows:
The evidence for the government, which was not controverted tended to show that on September 30, 1834, the defendant was married to Catharine Manning, in Queenstown, Ireland, by the Rev. P. Sulivan, a Roman Catholic priest; that at the time of the alleged marriage the defendant was a Protestant and Catharine a Roman Catholic; that the alleged marriage was duly recorded in the Catholic marriage register of the parish of Queenstown, Ireland; that the defendant and Catharine lived together as husband and wife in Queenstown for about three years, and from thence removed to Barringtown in Ireland, where three children were born to them, and from thence to Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, and ultimately to St. John New Brunswick, where they continued to live together as husband and wife (having in all ten children born to them) until the year 1859; that during the year 1859 the defendant left Catharine and came to Harwich in this Commonwealth, and on November 13, 1861, was married to one Betsey Cook, of Yarmouth in this Commonwealth, at said Yarmouth, and lived and cohabited with Betsey Cook in Harwich until some time in October, 1874, when Catharine, having in the mean time discovered the whereabouts of the defendant, came to Harwich for the defendant, and they together returned to St. John stopping and cohabiting as man and wife in Boston in this Commonwealth for about the space of one week; that the defendant and Catharine lived together as man and wife in St. John until some time in August, 1875, when the defendant again left Catharine and returned to Harwich, and there cohabited with Betsey until the time of finding this indictment.
There was evidence that the defendant had stated that the said Catharine was his wife, and letters from the defendant to Catharine, addressing her as his wife, were offered in evidence. It was also proved that no other marriage ceremony ever took place between the defendant and said Catharine except the aforesaid marriage ceremony by the said Sulivan, and that the defendant and Catharine had never cohabited in this Commonwealth, except during the space of about a week in Boston in October, 1874.
Upon this evidence, the defendant contended that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vergnani v. Guidetti
...upon the party who contends that that ceremony was invalid. Inhabitants of Raynham v. Inhabitants of Canton, 3 Pick. 293, 297;Commonwealth v. Kennedy, 120 Mass. 387;Turner v. Williams, 202 Mass. 500, 504, 89 N.E. 110, 24 L.R.A.,N.S., 1199, 132 Am.St.Rep. 511; Finer v. Steuer, 255 Mass. 611,......
-
Vergnani v. Guidetti
...of the burden of persuasion upon the party who contends that that ceremony was invalid. Raynham v. Canton, 3 Pick. 293, 297. Commonwealth v. Kenney, 120 Mass. 387 Turner v. Williams, 202 Mass. 500, 504. Finer v. Steuer, 255 Mass. 611 , 621. Edwards v. Cockburn, 264 Mass. 112 , 125. Riley v.......
-
Ferrell v. State
...would seem to make the presumption a conclusive one. At best it can, in the nature of things, be prima facie only (Commonwealth v. Kenney, 120 Mass. 387; Fleming v. People, 27 N.Y. 329), though, in absence of testimony tending to prove the existence of legal impediments, it would be suffici......
-
Gorrasi v. Manzella
...for instance, it should seem fit to require the party who denies the marriage to prove its invalidity.’ It was held in Commonwealth v. Kenney, 120 Mass. 387, that, in the absence of evidence as to the law of the foreign country where it took place, a ‘marriage solemnized by a priest, and un......