79 N.C. 290 | N.C. | 1878
The plaintiffs next introduced the deposition of R. W. Russell, an attorney at law, residing in Savannah, Georgia, who testified that he knew the plaintiffs, and that they are the children of Alfred E. Jones and Sarah A. Jones, his wife; that he had known Alfred 22 years, and that he died in Savannah on 15 December, 1874.
The plaintiffs then produced and read in evidence a duly certified copy of a marriage license of Alfred E. Jones and Sarah A. Dill, taken from the records of the Court of Ordinary of Chatham County, Georgia, and of a certificate that they were duly married on 22 May, 1850, signed by the Rev. James E. Godfrey, the minister who performed the ceremony of marriage.
All the foregoing evidence was admitted without objection, but upon it, the defendants asked the Court to instruct the jury that it was not sufficient to warrant them in finding that Alfred E. Jones had been legally married, and that the plaintiffs are his lawful children. His Honor refused the instruction, and the jury found the issue in favor of the plaintiffs. Judgment. Appeal by defendants.
No actual marriage was shown, nor was it shown or offered to be shown, what would constitute a valid marriage by the laws of Georgia, where the marriage was alleged to have been celebrated. But in all Christian States, especially in the States of the American Union, which, although in some respects *223
foreign to each other, have a common origin, and in other respects, a constitutional community of rights and interests, it is presumed that the common law prevails, and that the same proofs which are sufficient to establish the fact of marriage in one State will be likewise sufficient to establish the same fact in another State. Brown v. Pratt,
By the common law it is held to be a general rule of universal application in civil cases, except in actions for criminal conversation, that reputation, cohabitation, the declarations and conduct of the parties, are competent evidence of marriage between them. Archer v. Haithcock,
As such evidence would have been competent to establish marriage in this State by the common law, by the same law it must be held to be competent to establish that the parties were legally married according to the laws of Georgia. There was not only sufficient but plenary evidence of the marriage.
Affirmed.
Cited: Spaugh v. Hartman,
(293)