Charles City Co., VA, Court Orders, 1687-1695
Attorney General William Randolph Esq. for the King and Queen of England vs. Charles Bartholomew and Rebecca the relict of Francis Poythress; 4 June 1694, 3 July 1694; 3 August 1694; at Westover Court concerning an unlawful marriage.
Transcript:
p. 502. June 4 1694. Wheras the Attorney Genll. Exhibited an Informacon against Charles Bartholomew uppon an unlawfull marriage and ye sherr making returne of the process that he left a note of summons att his House. And the sd Bartholomew fayling to appear Attachmt is awarded against his body returnable into the next Court.
Attachmt issued June 20 1694.
Ordered that the sherr summon Rebecca ye relict of Francis Poythres psonally to appear at the next Court to answer an Informacon exhibited by the attorny generall concerning an unlawfull mariage with Charles Bartholomew.
p. 504. June 4 1694. All wittnesses as well in this cause of John Moore as of Charles Bartholomew are to attend ye next cort.
p. 505. July 3 1694. Att a Court holden att Westover the third day of July 1694. Present their Majties Justices. Capt James Busse / Capt Henry Batte / Mr. Richard Bland / Capt Daniel Luellin / Mr Robert Bolling / Capt John Hamelin/
Uppon the Informacon exhibited the last court by William Randolph Esq Attorney Genll of our Soveraigne Lord and Lady the King and Queen against Charles Bartholomew for an incestious mariage wth Rebecca Poythres. The sd Charles Bartholomew appears in Court and pleads to the Jurisdicon of the Court in hoc verba. And the sd Charles Bartholomew comes and sayes that by the Statute 25.H.8 and alsoe by the Statute 1 Eliz. Cap. 1. It is in Parliemnt declared to be a Prerogative Royall of the King his heyr & sucessor to ratify and confirm att canons and constitutions ecclesiasticall according to the form of which statutes James the first late King of England &c did by his Letter Patents in the first year of his reign ratify certaine canons and constitucon eccles strictly comanding all Arch Bi:ss Bss &c to set and proceive all and every of the same certaine orders &c to be in all poynts duely observed and he sayeth that by the 99th of the sd canons and constitutions eccles It is ordered that none marry within the degrees prohibited. and also he sayeth that by the stat. 24:H.8. it is expressly declared that cause of Matrimony by right apertaine to the spirituall Jurisdiction and the sd Charles Bartholomew sayeth that the matter aleadged against him in the sd Informacon is for marrying (contrary to ye laws of God and man) with his wifes sister which he conceives to be a cause only congnisable by an eccles Jurisdicon and therefore he prays the Judgmt of the Court whether they will or ought to proceed on the sd Informacon &c.
The Court overules this plea and assert their Jursidicon for that noe Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall Jurisdicon was ever executed or putt in use within this their Mjties Dominion of Virg. But the administracon of Justrice in all causes hath been ever here executed and administered in and by their Mjties and their Preogenitors by virtue of their Royall Lett. Patents or Comissions directed to their Governce for the time being with power (inter alia) to constitute.
p. 506. July 3 1694. to constitute Courts in the respective Countys wch Courts by virtue therof have authority &c and Jurisdicon &c. The sd Bartholomew thus overuled pleads over and sayeth that he hath not marryed within the degrees prohibited by the Leviticall law.
John Jane sworne that he knew Frances the late wife of Charles Bartholomew and knows Rebecca the relict of Francis Poythres and that the sd Frances and Rebecca were sisters always reputed being the daughters of one Mother. And as to the mariage between Charles Bartholomew and the sd Rebecca he sayeth on his oath that he knows noe otherwise therof (as not being present at the mariage) but by the comon and general repute therof and of their liveing together as man and wife. John Bishop swares the same wth John Jane in all poynts.
Joshua Wynn sworn sayeth that from his childhood he knew the sd women and that they were allways taken for sisters both by one mother. That he was not at the mariage but knows Bartholomew and Rebecca to be reputed man and wife and as such live togeather.
By reason of the absence of Mr Georg Robinson clerk who is sayd to be sick and is the person who joyned them in mariage. The Attorny Genll impartes to ye next Court and the sd Charles by his consent joynes in the Refferr. to the next Court accordingly.
p. 509. Aug 3 1694. William Randolph Esq Attorny Genll: brings on the Referr of last court being uppon an Informacon against Charles Bartholomew concerning an incestious marriage. Which Informacon is in hoc verba. To the Rt Worpll the Court of Charles Citty Com.
William Randolph Attorny Genll for our soveraign Lord and Lady King William and Queen Mary humbly gives this Court to understand and be informed. That by the 12th act of Assembly (in the printed book instituted none to be maryed but by the minister nor by them but by license or publishing banes) it is provided that noe marryage be solemnized or reputed vallid in Law but such as is made by the Minister according to the laws of England. and wheras the lawes of England doe provide that none shall marry within certain degrees of consanguinity and affinity. and particularly that a man shall not marry his wifes sister. Notwithstanding which Charles Bartholomew of the parish of Westover and County of Charles Citty and Rebeccah the late wife of Major ffrancis Poythres of the parish and County decd did on or about the 2 day of February 1693 procure themselves to be joynd in Matrimony by Mr Georg Robinson of the parish of Bristoll and County of Henrico Clerk then a stranger to them and ever since have and still doe live together as man and wife contrary to the lawes of God and man. Wherefore this informant in quallity afforsd prays that the sd Charles and Rebeccah may be separated and their Marriage declared (as it is by law) voyd and invallid and that security for their seperacon may be given according to law &c.
p. 510. August 3 1694. Charles Bartholomew being the last court overuled in his plea to the Jurisdicon of the Court pleaded over & sayeth That he hath not married within the degrees prohibited by the Leviticall law. But the Court considering this plea doe say they are to give judmt uppon the lawes of England and of this Dominion and therefore reject this plea of the sd Bartholomew and requires him to amend his plea.
And the sd Charles Bartholomew pleads the genll issue not guilty in manner and forme and therof putts himself on the Country and Mr Att. likewise.
The sherr is comanded to bring to barr 12 men &c. The Jurors empanelled and sworne were viz. William Harrison / Joseph Harwood / Thomas Cotten, Xpher Hudson, John Blackburn / John Lett / William Gardner / Lewis Green Daniel Clark / Walter Nunoly / Richard Taylor / Alison Clark /
George Robinson Clerke sworn in Court Sayeth that he marryed the sd Charles Bartholomew to the sd Rebecca the 2 day of ffebruary 1693 in the County of Henrico.
William Epes sworn also in Court sayeth he did see the sd Charles Bartholomew and the sd Rebecca maried together on the second day of February in Henrico County.
John Jane sayeth uppon his oath that he knew Frances and knows the sd Rebecca and he married with one of the sisters of the sd Rebecca and he ever held and tooke the sd Rebecca and Frances to be sisters that is to say the daughters of one mother but of divers fathers. and as to the marriage of Charles Bartholomew he sayeth that the sd Charles and Frances lived togeather as man and wife and as such were reputed and taken by him but was not att their marriage.
Mr Thomas Blighton uppon his oath sayeth that he frequented the house of one John Coggan in the life time of the sd Cogans wife and had often heard the sd Cogans wife call the sd Rebecca and Frances daughters and have heard the sd daughters owne them selves sisters and allwayes in the time of such his frequenting and ever since he reconed them sisters if the half blood. and as to the mariage of Charles with Frances he sayeth he knew them to live together and
p. 511. reputed and tooke it yt they were man and wife and sometime before their mariage was sayd to be solemnized the sd Frances demanded his the sd Blightons oppenion of the fittness of the sd Charles to be her husband.
Thes four last recited evidences were given to the Jurors who were sent forth to try the sd Issue and returning to barr dellivered (by Wm Harrison their foreman) this verdict. viz. We find the sd Charles Bartholomew Not guilty. wch verdict the sd Charles Bartholomew desires may be recorded and it is soe recorded. Not guilty accordingly.
And the sd Charles further prays judgmt uppon the verdict. This Court theruppon have considered that the sd Charles Bartholomew be dismissed without day. Mr Attorny Genll. appeales from this Judgment to the fourth day of the next generall Court. Ordered that the sd Bartholomew give sureties to answer this appeale. Att the motion of the Att. Genll. The sherr is required to take the sd Bartholomew and him safely keep till he give sureties for his liveing a part from the sd Rebecca untill this suite be determined att the next genll Court.
This transcript does not include the appeal by the Attorney General to the next General Court.
%20(2)a.jpg)