Wives & husbands testifying against each other

[ercall]

"Tis a truth universally acknowledged" that husbands and wives cannot testify against each other in court (except for treason) but, what if they're divorced?  I'm thinking 17th century here.  I have a couple, already divorced, who accused each other of forgery & the husband sought the king's pardon to divulge the name of the forgerer.  Attorney General would only grant him a pardon if he revealed the forger's name first. Now, the husband "disappeared" not long after this, hence me thinking that, when it was divulged to be his divorced wife, no such pardon could be issued.  Does anyone know, therefore, if the rule holds - even if the couple are divorced then?  The man's subsequent actions seem to suggest this.

[jim1]

Are you sure they divorced. In the 17th. C it was a very lengthy & expensive process & took an Act of Parliament to achieve. Also is it likely she was the person responsible for making the dies as this would have required a great deal of skill.
Issuing or passing counterfeit coins was quite common & it may be they were involved in that rather than the manufacturing.
Once the contract of marriage was severed I can't see a reason why one couldn't testify against the other.

[ercall]

Thanks Jim,
I know the husband began the process of petitioning for a divorce - I'm checking it went through to completion with the Court of Arches now.  As regards the forgery process, this was in respect of documents being forged rather than coin of the realm being counterfeited and yes, the lady knew the process and described in court; how saffron was obtained to make the ink seem aged, parchment was rubbed against glass windows to make documents seem old etc.  Their reasons for testifying against each other after the marriage ended I believe was mutual animosity/hatred.  Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned and the marriage faltered over adultery.  The bit I'm not sure about is whether testifying against a spouse is okay after a divorce, or whether "what God hath joined together ...." continues to mean a couple are still one in the eyes of God, even if not the law.

[jim1]

Had they divorced there was nothing to stop them from testifying against each other. There could be a argument that as the offences occurred while married they couldn't but I doubt it would hold much water as in an age where there was little in the way of evidence gathering witness testimony was vital for any conviction.

[ercall]

Thank you, much appreciate your thoughts.

[Galium]

There is no law to prevent one spouse testifying against the other.  (How would someone be able to bring a case of abuse within marriage otherwise?)
However, spouses cannot be compelled to do so.

[ercall]

Thank you Galium,
I think its a case of different jurisdictions.  Husband and wives testifying against each other, say in an abuse cases, would of course be allowed but it would be a matter for the ecclesiastical courts.  In this case it was a criminal matter at the King's Bench.  The judge during the trial said "But by the Law the Husband cannot be a Witness against his Wife, nor a Wife against her Husband, to charge them with anything Criminal, except only in Cases of High Treason.  This is so known a Common Rule, that I thought it could never have borne any Question or Debate".
But thank you for responding.

[Billyblue]

If they are divorced, they are no longer husband and wife.
Ergo, no barrier re testifying

I'd agree with Galium, depending on the jurisdiction, though.

Dawn M

[ercall]

Thank you.