--By the New York's mails we have further particulars of the great case of
Patterson.
vs.
Bonaparte, which was opened at
Paris, before the First Chambers of the
Civil Tribunal of the Seine, on Friday, the 25th of last month, as our readers are aware from what has already appeared in the
Herald.
From the very natural curiosity which the case excites, the court-room was as full as it could possibly be. The proceedings were opened by
M. Legrand,
acout for
Mrs. Elizabeth Patterson, presenting the following conclusions: ‘"That it may please the Tribunal to declare the marriage contracted on the 24th of December, 1803, between the late Prince Jerome and
Elizabeth Patterson valid.
And also to take judicial cognizance
(donner acte) that
M. Bonaparte, while demanding that the marriage of the 24th of December,1803, may be declared valid, has never had any intention, to contest, and does not now contest, the civil and political effects of the union contracted in 1807 by his father with the Princess Catherine of Wurtemburg."’
M. Berryer followed on the same side in an uninterrupted speech of four hours and a half, when the
Court rose for a recess.
On resuming,
M. Allon opened the case for Prince Napoleon, and was bold enough to say that the eloquent advocate opposed to him ‘"had very little hopes of winning his case."’ He rests his case entirely upon the law of
France, at the time, of the provisions of which, he says,
Miss Patterson was well aware, when she said, ‘"If I can be his wife for an hour I will run the risk;"’ and that, knowing the legal objections to the marriage, she had not contracted it in good faith.
On the conclusion of his speech the
Court adjourned for a week.
The
Paris papers are absolutely silent on the subject --even the fact of the trial is not mentioned in their news columns.
