Baker v. Baker

Citations

• 13 Cal. 87

Syllabus

<p>The 8th section of the Act of 1851, concerning divorces, which provides, that “ no divorce shall be granted in any action by default of the defendant, nor on the admission or statement of either party,” does not prohibit the introduction of confessions in evidence, but simply prevents granting a decree on them alone.</p> <p>This was the rule of the common and English Ecclesiastical law, and our statute is merely affirmatory of that rule.</p> <p>The object of the rule requiring proof, in corroboration of defendant’s confessions, is to guard against collusion; and when the entire testimony, confessions, and circumstances, repel all suspicion of collusion, and leave no doubt of the truth of the confessions, the Court should act upon them.</p> <p>Where a statute is in affirmance of the common law, it is to be construed as was the rule by that law.</p> <p>In a verified answer an evasion of the controlling fact in issue, is a strong circumstance against the defendant.</p> <p>A child born in lawful wedlock, is presumed to be the child of the husband. The marriage is an acknowledgment by the husband that the child is his’; but, to be effective, there must be knowledge at the time of the fact admitted. Hence, where a man marries a woman with child, the law presumes the child is his; but this presumption is based upon the assumed fact that he knew, at the time of his marriage, the situation of the woman.</p> <p>Marriage by our law is a civil contract, and may be avoided for material and substantive fraud in its procurement; and ante-nuptial pregnancy by a stranger is a fraud going to the very substance of the contract, vitiates it «6 initio, and authorizes a divorce.</p> <p>A woman to be marriageable must, at the time, be able to bear children to her husband ; and a representation to this eifect is implied in the very nature of the contract.</p>