THE QUEEN v THOMAS FANNING. [Crown Cases Reserved.]

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 03 May 1866
• Date: 03 May 1866
• Court: Court for Crown Cases Reserved (Ireland)

Crown Cases Reserved.

THE QUEEN

and

THOMAS FANNING.

Hanley's case Car. Cr. Law, 254.

Regina v. OrgillENR 9 C. & P. 80.

Regina v. ChadwichUNK 2 Cox Cr. C. 319.

Bruce v. Burke 2 Ad. 471.

Regina v. OrgillENR 9 C. & P. 80.

Flaherty's caseENR 2 C. & K. 782.

Darcy's minorsIR 11 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 298.

Thelwall v. YelvertonIR 14 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 188.

Brawn's case 5 Ir. Law Rep. 549.

Regina v. BurkeENR 1 Cox C. C. 34, and 1 C. & K. 144.

Regina v. PensonENR 5 C. & P. 412.

Regina v. PensonENR 5 C. & P. 412.

Regina v. AllisonENR Also reported in R. & R. 109.

M'Inerney's case Ir. Cir. R. 270.

Graham's case 2 Lewin's C. C. 97.

Burt v. Burt 8 W. R. 552.

Regina v. EdwardsENR 1 Russ. & Ry. 283.

Sullivan v. Sullivan 2 Hug. Cons. C. 238.

Regina v. Inhabitants of TibshelfENR 1 B. & Ad. 190.

Regian v. Inhabitants of WroxtonENR 4 B. & Ad. 640.

Regina v. Chadwick 11 Q. B. 205.

The Queen v. MillisENR 10 Cl. & Fin. 689.

Regina v. Millis Smythe & Bourke's R. 211 & 213.

The Queen v. Drake 1 Lewin's Cr. C. 25.

The Queen v. Povey 1 Dears. Cr. C. 32; S. C. 22 Law Jour., M. C. 19.

Burt v. BurtENR 2 S. & T. 88.

Regina v. OrgillENR 9 C. & P. 80.

Yelverton v. Yelverton 10 Jur., N. S. 1215.

The King v. AllisonENR R. & R. 109.

The King v. Penson 5 Car. & p. 412.

Duchess of Kingston's caseST1 20 State Trials, 514.

Rex v. John PensonENR 5 Car. & P. 412.

Regina v. BrawnENR 1 C. & K. 144.

Rex v. EdwardsENR R. & R. 283.

Rex v. AllisonENR R. & R. 109.

The Queen v. MillisENR 10 Cl. & Fin. 688.

Regina v. PoveyENR 1 Dears. C. C. 32.

Burt v. BurtENR 2 S. & T. 88.

The Queen v. OrgillENR 9 C. & P. 80.

Darcys minorsIR 11 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 306.

Thelwall v. YelvertonIR 14 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 207.

Yelverton v. Yelverton 10 Jur., N. S. 1215.

Rex v. PensonENR 5 C. & P. 412.

Regina BrawnENR 1 C. & K. 144.

Drake's caseENR 1 Lewin, 25.

Graham's caseENR 2 Lewin, 97.

Regina v. PoveyENR 1 Dears. C. C. 32.

Burt v. BurtENR 2 S. & T. 288.

The Queen v. MillisENR 10 Cl. & Fin. 688.

Edwards's caseENR R. & R. 283.

Regina v. OrgillENR 9 C. & P. 80.

Re Darcys MinorsIR 11 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 298.

Thelwall v. YelvertonIR 14 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 209.

Rex v. PensonENR 5 C. & P. 412.

Regina v. BrawnENR 1 C. & K. 144; S. C., Cox. C. C. 33.

Regina v. OrgillENR 9 C. & P. 80.

Duchess of Kingston's caseST1 20 St. Tr. 514.

Rex v. Inhabitants of TibshelfENR 1 B. & A. 190.

Inhabitants of WroxtonENR 4 B. & A. 640.

Regina v. Chadwick 11 Q. B. 205.

Rex v. OrgillENR 9 C. & P. 80.

Drake's caseENR 1 Lewin, 25.

Regina v. AllisonENR R. & R. 109.

Regina v. EdwardsENR R. & R. 283.

Graham's caseENR 2 Lewin, 97.

Regina v. PoveyENR Dears. C. C. 32.

The Queen v. OrgillENR 9 C. & P. 80.

Regina v. ButlerENR R. & R. 61.

The Queen v. Millis 10 Cl. & F. 688.

Burt v. BurtENR 2 Sw. & Tr. 88.

The Queen v. BrawnENR 1 C. & K. 144; S. C., 1 Cox, C. C. 33.

The Queen v. OrgillENR 9 C. & P. 80.

The Queen v. EdwardsENR Russ. & Ry. 283.

The Queen v. Brawn 1 Cox C. C. 144.

COMMON LAW REPORTS. 289 M. T. 1865. Crown Cases Reserved. ••••n•••••••,e••n•0 COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED. Nov, 18. THE QUEEN v. THOMAS FANNING.* E. ApT. ril1866. 17. May 3. THE following case was reserved by Mr. Justice KEOGH and Mr. Indictment for bigamy. Baron HUGHES:- rie A. to mar- The S., was indicted at the Commission held in and for the according to county of the city of Dublin, on the 25th of October last, for that the rites of the Established he, on the 4th day of October, in the year of our Lord 1 85 8, at Church, in 1858, and in St. Peter's parish church, in the county of the city of Dublin, did April 1865, during the life marry one Mary Stewart, spinster, and her the said Mary then and time of M. S., he was married there had for his wife; and that the said Thomas Fanning after- to C. B., in a Roman Catho wards, and whilst he was so married to the said Mary aforesaid, to lic church, in Dublin. C. B. wit, on the 23rd day of April, in the year of our Lord 1865, at the knew A. six m- Roman Catholic church in Westland-row, in the county of the city viousonths toprethe of Dublin aforesaid, feloniously and unlawfully did marry and take marriage, and believed him to to wife one Catherine Brien, and to her the said Catherine Brien be a Roman Catholic. He was then and there married, the said Mary, his former wife, being told C. B. that he was a Ro then alive ; against peace and statute, man Catholic. He had been Prisoner pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr. Curran. born and reared a Pro- First witness, Abraham Stewart, deposed-that he was a witness testant, and had attended to the marriage in St. Peter's church, Aungier-street, in the city of the Protestant service Dublin, on the 4th of October 1858, of Mary Anne Stewart and Christmas 1865. the prisoner ; they were married by the Rev. Mr. M`Sorley, a morning * Comm MONAHAN, C. J., PIGOT, C. B., KEOGH, CHRISTIAN, O'BRIEN, HAYES, JJ., FITZGERALD, HUGHES, BB., FITZGERALD.J., DEASY, B., and O'HAGAN, voL. 17 37 L 290 COMMON LAW REPORTS. Anne Stewart was and is a Protestant, and is still alive ; she is here in Court at present. Second witness, Catherine Brien, proved-She knows the priÂÂsoner twelve months last Sunday ; on the 23rd of last April he was married to her in Westland-row chapel ; he told me he was a Roman Catholic; from the time she knew him he professed himself to be a Roman Catholic ; they were called three times in the Roman Catholic church ; she lived with him after the marriage, believing him to have been a single man previously to the marriage. On cross-examination, and in reply to the question-Did he ever tell you he was a Roman Catholic ?-0h, yes, several times, both before and after the marriage ; he never told me he had a wife and children before ; did not know that till the Lime he was arrested ; the prisoner lived in Donnybrook, and before we were married he used to come to see me at Merrion market ; he never stayed all night before we were married ; he went to chapel with me the night before we were married, and the day we were married ; it is usual for Roman Catholics to go to the chapel the day before they are married. And in reply to the question when the clergyman asked him-Was he a Catholic ? did not you say he was an ignorant Catholic, and knew nothing at all ? she replied, No ; when the clergyman asked him was he a Catholic, he answered and said he was. This closed the case for the Crown. First witness for the prisoner, James Fanning, proved-He is the prisoner's father, and a Protestant ; the prisoner is a Protestant ; was baptized and reared a Protestant; never in his life knew him to be a professing Roman Catholic; he has come to church with witness : and on cross-examination he stated he had a son who went with the prisoner to church within the last twelve months ; and last Christmas morning witness went with him to the Protestant church at Simmons'-court ; and that on other occasions within twelve months witness had seen him go into the Protestant church. Second witness, Thomas Scantlin, proved-Since he knew the prisoner he believed him to be a Protestant; I know him about COMMON LAW REPORTS. 291 eleven or twelve years ; never saw him go to church; by his M. T. 1865. Crown Cases expressions knows his religion ; by expressions to witness believed Reserved. him to be a Protestant; about six, or eight, or ten months ago, he THE QUEEN told me he was a Protestant, in ordinary conversation. Third witness, Thomas Goff-Knows the prisoner since he was FANNING. born ; he is a Protestant ; witness is a Protestant ; was with him in church very often ; is unable to say whether he was in church with him these six months, but witness has been in church with him within the last twelve months. Mr. Curran, on behalf of the prisoner, submitted that it had been proved the prisoner was a Protestant, or professed to be a ProÂÂtestant, within twelve months before the second marriage, and that under the Act of Parliament the second marriage was void. The Court called for the production, as a witness, of the clergyÂÂman who performed the second marriage ceremony. The Rev. Mr. Barry, Roman Catholic clergyman, thereupon proved that he is one of the clergymen' of Westland-row chapel, and married Thomas Fanning and Catherine Brien on the 23rd of April last ; can identify Catherine Brien, but cannot swear to the prisoner ; and in reply to the question-Are you able to state whether you asked him whether he was a Roman Catholic ? witness replied, he presented himself as a Catholic, and therefore I asked him no questions touching his religion ; he came in the ordinary course to be married; the banns were taken down, and the names published in the usual way. At whose request were the names published, or the banns taken down ?-At the request of the parties themselves. The banns were taken down by the Rev. Mr. Meyler. I asked the man no quesÂÂtions, as far as I remember. And thereupon the Rev. Robert Meyler proved-I am one of the clergymen of Westland-row chapel.-[Banns produced.]-I took down that document at the request of the parties themselves, Fanning and Brien ; I could not identify either the. man, or the woman. Are you able to state whether the parties from whom you took down the matter that composes that document stated anything 292 COMMON LAW REPORTS. about religion ?-I am sure they did not; they came in the ordinary way as Catholics ; as a matter of course, I took them to be CaÂÂtholics, and I asked no questions of them ; but I am sure I asked the man was he married before, and that he said he was not. And, at the request of the jury, Catherine Brien was recalled, and in reply to the question-Did the prisoner tell you how long he was a Catholic before he was married ? replied, he always told me he was a Roman Catholic, from the first hour we were acquainted ; I asked him what .religion he was ; he said he was a Roman...