The Petition of Henry C de Rham to the General Assembly of Rhode-Island

Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: NARRATIVE Of the principal facts which led to the Marriage, and of some of the principal causes of separation; with references to sundry letters used- in evidence at the trial: and remarks on some of Mr. D'hauteville's suggestions. It is true that the Respondent was married to Mr- D'Hauteville as the...
More Description

Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: NARRATIVE Of the principal facts which led to the Marriage, and of some of the principal causes of separation; with references to sundry letters used- in evidence at the trial: and remarks on some of Mr. D'hauteville's suggestions. It is true that the Respondent was married to Mr- D'Hauteville as the petition states, and it happened under the following circumstances. At near the age of eighteen, while travelling with her parents in Europe, and during their stay in Paris, in May 1837, she became acquainted with this gentleman. She was pleased with him as a visitor, so were her parents. He presently began to pay his addresses to her: and after about three weeks from his first introduction to the family, he one day found means to induce her, in a singularly unguarded moment, to entangle herself with a sudden matrimonial engagement to him, which, by the course of events, she was foolishly led to imagine she could not afterwards recede from with honor: and consequently, notwithstanding her strong prepossessions against any foreign connection, and not without a painful struggle, she was married to him, in pursuance solely of that inconsiderate engagement, and under a mistaken sense of duty. The marriage took place on the 22d August, 1837, not at Hauteville as the petition states, but at Montreux, in its neighborhood, with the full consent, it is true, but the Respondent would hardly say, as the Petitioner does, with the entire approbation of her parents. The truth is, that there were at that time?that is, the time immediately preceding the marriage great misgivings on their part as well as hers. And they, as well as herself, would then have been well pleased to have been honorably excused from the performance of their contract. But it is due to all parties to add, that t...