In re McCAUSLAND

1. We claim that the whole evidence does not show honest consent to assume the status of husband and wife and consummation predicated thereon, but continued illicit intercourse.

Secs. 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75: Persons marrying without the solemnization of, (sec. 70) tomate a declaration of marriage (76) in presence of witness, (77) to be acknowledged and recorded. None of these things were done.

A mode of establishing and proving a marriage without solemnization being thus provided by statute, no other proof can establish it.

Town of Milford v. Worcester, 7 Mass. 48 s Where there are State laws governing marriage, they must be pursued.

Where parties are living in a meretricious way, a promise to marry in future is not marriage, though cohabitation continue. In this case at bar, in January, 1873, he promised to marry her on the 4th of July, but did not. ( 3 Bradf. 432; Hill v. Burger, 442, and following; Holmes v. Holmes, 1 Sawy. 9 .)

2. We contend that the Court erred in allowing claimant to testify. Our objection was founded on subdivision 3, sec.,,1880, Code Civil Procedure, as amended: * * * “ Parties to an action or proceeding, or in whose behalf an action or…