The Sun. — London, England, 1812-08-14 00:00:00

SCOTLAND. - 7'rnirET or SESS:ON, SECOND DIVISION. TIOGG V. GOW. . • This was an action of damages for breach of . of marline. The pursue r is a young lady, who carried on business as a . marituainaker; aw, the &fender is a well known teacher of music in Edinburgh. In summer 1809, the de fender, who had been for some tge on terms of intimacy in the fa.-Wily of the pursner, fnade pro, osals of marriage to her, and, after a course of most aaidous and unremitting dttentiou, at length obtained her consent. 'At that period, the: defender was a whin:Ter, and bad a family of grown up ChiAdien,,and it was alleged by the pur suer, that, toithe sarnples which both she and. her sister repeatedly expressed, as to how they might stand affected to the step be meant to take, Mr. Gott' uniformly replied, that his circmnstances were such as to enable him to, provide, for his fa _ fully, if they should disapprove t-j . ,tlt'e match, but that he was persuaded they never would 6bject to any arrangement which was essential to his hap piness ; and, for a period of a year and a half, the intimacy was continued, while both parties Visited, and were invited out together by their anutual friends_, -and the pursuer had not the slightest reason to Suppose, that any or Mr. Go:l°s fa mily would-be displeased at the prospect of a nearer alliance., Dining all this time, a correspondence, by let ters, was occasionally kept, up, of that free and . unreserved 'nature which was warranted by the prospect of the speedy union of the parties. - in the course of November 1810, however, the pursuer observed 'an alteration in the conduct of the defender, acid at last, upon the 25th day of that month, she received a letter from him, setting forth, that he found his children Were displeased with the idea of his marriage again; and'that up on this account, he 'must . renouncetli - pretensions s .• • to her hand. On receiving this letter, in whieb,.. as stated, the defender made the opposition of his family a pretext for violating the engageinents which had proceeded so great a length, a farther correspon dence ensued, in which the pursuer's father took a share, the issue of Nbith confirmed the parties Of the resolution of the defender not to celebrate the marriage. The pursuer then, in consequence, resolved to appeal to a Court of juStice; for the only redress which remained on what she con ' sidered so wanton and unprovoked an outrage on her feelings and happiness, 40 an action' was accordingly raised against ar.-tow, concluding for damages. _ In defence, against this action, it was stated, by the Counsel for Mr. Gow', that he makes his bread by playing and teaching the violin. —About three years ago, his wire died, leav ing him, though not much advanced in years, the father of a family, grown and growing up to . the age of men and women. As his time is occu pied in teaching during the day, and his business requires him during the evenings of winter, gene rally for Many days in the week, to be absentfrom his own house, and sometimes at a considerable distance, he resolved to marry, as soon as was consistent with a due respect the memory of his deceased wife. He had previously been acquainted with Miss Mary . Hogge the pursuer, who, having received as good an education as her father's circumstances would admit, had-been established as a mantoa maker in Edinburgh, for some years, aad he ob tained leave to pay his addresses to her. Miring -the friendly intercourse which follow ed, one of the principal objects, on the part of the -pursuer, was to conciliate the. esteem of the Oefender's ,children, and the 'defender solemnly avers, that be neither prOmiseehherenarriage, nor gave her reason to supposeeleethe was about to ask her in marriage, upon any. other terms, or with any other view than that she should prove an useful Mother to his children.. She herself seemed equally aware that this was a point of in - diepeusable importance ; and accordingly, the at tention of -both was directed to that object for some time: 'ln the course of their correspond - eece; however,. an accident happened, which, if it -did not altogether put an end to' any hopes of that kind, ,at least renderer' theire extremely dis tant,and uncertain.—The pursuer's . brother, John Hogg,. had paid his addresses to the defender's daughter, and, after a very Slight • acquaintaSce, he abruptly prOposed that they should solemnise their enarryge, without ever informing the de fender or any of her relations. Indeed, he went so far as to attempt to cerry'her- out of the de fender's house. This necessarily put •an end to all friendly corn meecation between the' two families • but -the t:efender, whe; Was quite aware that the pursuer could not approve of any' such measure, did' not despair, for,some time, of reconciling his children to her. ThiS, however, he at . last found alto gether impossible,eand -he thought it his duty to Mention the matter to the pursuer, in order.that she might be fully aware of the turn which mat ters 'had taken ; and if she thought it unwise to keep up the correspondence any longer with the defender, that she might break it off. The de - fender did -not make his addresses to any other lady, nor did upon his part altogether despair of accomplishing an union with the pursuer ; but he thought it .right to inform her hoW he.. stood in order that she might judge for herself, and either Freak off or. continue the_ correspondence with hiah .In answer, she gave him to understand, she never considered the consent - of his family as in dispensably. necessary for- their union ; that she and the defender might make themselves extreme ly hupy without any communication with his children e - and she insisted that be should proceed ,i 6 sole - Tie-else the marriage immediately; and it ap rearieg to the defender that this would be Abele doithi'glthe duty to his family, and as he could not help entertaining. great doubts" whether any union' formed iii such circumstances could be happy, he declined further correspondence. The -r`efences, therefore, were—lst, it is not true that the de tender ever gained the affeetions of the pnreuer . under promise of marriage, and afterwards cause re used to fulfil englttemcnt ; The t defender never intere,anged promise of marriag& witli - the pursuer - 3dlv, 'the libel .is alto gether irrelevant.--$t is not even libelled that any consequences foll6wed upon- the allt:Ted promise of marriage, and therefore it was perfectly:cola . peteot for either party to resile . therefrom, rebith, rote cis. In answering these defences, and narrative of the defeqder, the pursuer referred tck he corrc-, spondence Width had taken ,place be“.;.e.cti the , parties, and which would at once shes how far the defence was well founded flat the &deader never gained the pursuer's affection . untier.pro, misc . of Marriage. The words of the delenclees first-letter are conclusive of this pail of the gaes 7 , tion. The words are, " 1 entrusted Mrs. message to you, which, if delivered, you may "think indecorous ; first, as .being too soon after my loss ; and, secondly, in trusting it to any person. — - -Now, what other construction can be put upon•this letter than that it, was . an offer of marriage ? and the fact is ,abundantly plain, that fir. Gow - had previously secured free access-to the family_ and house of the pursuer, and was at li belly to. begin his courtship to her whenever, he pleased. "The corresponde*T. which followed this letter affords the most. distinct and unequivocal proof of an offer of marriage ; and an offer which, if it *as once accepted, the defender could not retract, trom,without subjecting himself to all the damage lie , might occasion by his inconstancy. The prod is, in the wlioe tenor of the evidence, , 'and in all the circumstances of-the case in the style and tenor of the whole letrers produced, wherein Mr. Gov iddresses the pursuer in the tenderest style of affection ; and the facts _which these letter§ establish, as . to the defender's visits to the parents and relations of the pursuer ;'their cons,ant solitary walks and appoint rents , , , gagnig her, witnout her knowledge, to dine and, visit at his intimate friends'; and,, in short, the strain, bene, and character of their intercourse, from the time that the first letter • was dispatched and answered.. But the defender, -although, he admits an en gagement, says it was qualified and conditional — that he was engaged to marry the pursuer, in so, far as his own will and power went; but that he was not to fulfil the engagethent unless he got the consent of his children. Man' instances have oc curred of marriage's being prevented for want of consent of parents, butthis is supposed to be the very first time that such - a proceeding, on the part of a father too, who. had. made his own fortune, end on avhom .his family were entirely dependent, was suspended on the consent of his children. It is not presumable that the pursuer could . ever have admitted Mr. Gow's addresses upon such an un derstanding.. That she was to receive him as her lover, and permit the whole' world. to be specta tors of their growing intimacy, in the mere hope and contingent expectation that if she could con trivo to make ,herself agreeable to his children, she might at last be promoted to the honour of being his wifeee-is too absurd to be listened to for a moment. No such arrangement ever could be proposed by any man of common sense to a wo man whom he thought of Marrying ; and there is no woman, and no father of a woman, wio would ever, look upon the author of such a pro posal but with that resentment and disdain which the bare mention of it must excite in the minds of all to whom it is stated'. Such, however, the Eroposition, , , Mr. Gow says, was deliberately made by him to a person of whom be still conti nues to speak in terms of the utmost respect and esteem, and was eagerly acceded to by her and all the members of her family !' and of this he offers not a shadow of proof, direct or indirect. But the defender attributes the failure of the ' riegociation betwixt him and the pursuer to ano ther circumstance, viz. that the pursuer's.brother had paid his addresses to one of his daughters, but that the young lady was not disposed to make him the return which he desired, and that he' thought fit to make an outrageous attempt to carry her out of the defender's house by force." ' In justice to her own cause, a 5 well as the character of her brother, so grossly, wantonly, and unjustly attacked, in a pleading relative to 'a case in' which he is not a party, an explanation of this is 'ne cessary.. It is true ; that in the course of the perpetual intercourse .which -.the defender encouraged, and even invited, between" the pursuer's brother and, his family; an attachment took placebetWeenlim and his daughter—his addresses were favourably received—and in July, 1810, he obtained her per mission to apply to her father for his consent' to their union. A letter, bearing date ca . July, 1810, written by the young lady to the pursuer's brother, demonstrates pretty clearly the terms on which they were at this period. ,On the 29th July, the pursuer's brother spoke to the defender on the subject, and after some difficulties stated by, him as to the awkwardness of the double con nexion between the families ; they were at last got over, and Mr. Gow declared himself,satisfied. On the following day, however; proposals in writing were sent the defender from another gen- - tlenian, 'and the young lady having: been left to her own choice, after writing two very angry letters to the pursuer's brother, accepted the lat ter °NT. But this affair eras not, as the de fender states, 'the cause of the rupture betwixt him &Aid the pursuer. This affair. took place in. July, and the letter from the defender to, the pur suer, in whith, for the first time, he corainun)cates his intentions to withdraw from his-engagements, is not, written till the month of November, that is, four months afterwards. Upon the whole, then, the pursuer submitted, that so far as the conduct of the defender is Con cerned, there is not a single circumstance stated by him in alleviation of his proceedings towards her, but what is proved to be false by evidence which canpot be resisted.. That he ,repeatedly promised her marriage—that mutual engagements passed between them in that view—no person who reads the 'letters in process can for one moment doubt. The same..evidence proves, too, that-when he receded from these engagements, he had re course to a pretext destitute of even the shadow of a foundation--e-covering . himself under a mean and untrue statement, that he had only informed ra m iv or a re - iolritinii ...bvtir . ,ll. they were acquatntded, as is most clearly establi-,heif (even by the letters of C4.t)w) four itionths ['More.. The case came originally bertire Lord Ne‘rton, ordinary, who, on 13th June 111, m'onounced the folto*.ving interlocutor The Lord Ordi nary having beard counsel for the parties at great length, on the grounds of the libel, defences, and writing produced, repels flit.: defences, and finds the defender liable• in damages to the pursuer ; modifies the same to five hundred pounds sterling-, and deeerns ; and finds the defender further liable in expenses." - • • Both parties submitted this judgment to review in mutual representatiotis ;. but, in the incan time, Lord Ne-,Vton havin4 died, the cause was remitted' to Lord Woodhouselee, who on advising these re presentations, pronounced an interlocutor, " find ,ing the 'defender liable. 'in damages ; lint in re spect of the whole circumstances of the case, mo dified the sum of damages to 3901. sterling,'and expellees of process ;" and in so far altered Lord Newton's interlocutor. Along with this judgment, the Lord Ordinary was also pleased to return into process the follow ing note, containing the reasons of. deliverance : " I regard this case as somewhat particular in its ' nature, and differing considerably from the cafe of a matrimonial engagement violated by one of the parties, from a change of 'affection, self-in terested.. motives, r or . motives -of Mere caprice, where damages are due as a solativin to the other party, and 'in some Measures in peeiium .of the fault`of the failure. In the present case, the de fender's breach of engagement dok not. seem to have arisen from a change of affection,: from sel fish purposes, or from motives of pure caprice, but solely front the strong repugnance (reasotrablb. or unreasonable) of the defender's family to the match, Which left him only a ezoiceletwen two gTeat evils, either to break his engagement, or to come to a rupture with all his children, whiCh a worthy parent will consider as a great Jnisfoi tune ; and the defender appears to have chosen what ap peared to him the lesser evil of the': two. lu this case, therefore, I cannot allow any thing to the penal consideration, but must,simply regard -the pursuer's soLtium arid, even on that point l icon-; sider this case as di&rent from the ordinary • cases„ of the kind, where the party complaining has suffered an injury in • point of character, which may happen, even from labidriuut incurred, and, which will, therefore; justly enter' in the estimate of solatiu*, but here there is no such These judgements were submitted to the review of the Court by both parties, in mutual reclaiming igetitions, in which the defender, after recapitu lating his former statements, endeavoured to show, by long and ingenious arguments, that this action could not be entertained in point of law ; that the 7;pursuer had suffered no patrimonial loss in con sequence of the notoriety of the courtship; that her reputation is altogether unblemished ; and that it will not be alleged that the defender has not, on every occasion, both before and since the com mencement of the action, treated her with every: possible degree of respect, and which her conduct and character so justly merited. • As to the amount of the damage, the defender submitted that the sum awarded was more than a person in the pursuer's situation in life was -en titled to expect, or the_ defender bound to, pay.— The deferider is a musician, whose income depends on his violin; or rather upon -the public taste for his rauSic ; he has a family to provide for, and in these circumstances he submitted, that 3001. was. much aboVe . any loss the pursuer could qualify, ac cerding to her own - view of the . case, anti - also' much above what the defender's circumstances can afford. The objections, in point of law, to :the compe tency of the action, and the damages sustained, Were most ably answered by the Counsel for the pur suer; and as to the amount of the damages, he sub- . ; rnitted . the discussion must, be necessarily short in dec).. The eminence, the success, the prudence; and economy, of Mr. Nathaniel Go};, are matters of public notoriety to every inhabitant of Edinburgh ; nor is it any thing less then preposterous for him to represent hitnself as a poor musician, depend ing for his daily subsistence on his violin, or rather on the precarious favour aid admiration of the public. If Mr. Gow were to be divorced froth his violin to-morrow,, he would retire with a very ,• handsome fortune, and the pursuer could instruct, that his income, for several years back, -has not fallen short of 20001. per annum. In such cir cumstances, it is altogether ludicrous to speak of the defender's inability to pay-more than 3001. — One who has destroyed the happiness and prospe • rity of a whole life, certainly has no reason to complain ii he is ordained to atone for it by paying even tie income of a single year. Upon advising this case, their Lordships were nearly unanimous in opinion that the action was competent. It had been admitted '(it was ob.- , served) that such actions were competent and common in' England, and were we, it was asked, to be told, in the nineteenth century, that what was considered as a most grievous injury-in Ene; land, should not be considered so in Scotland A person_was liable to damages if he trespassed on the property "Of another—if he inflicted a biow iri the heat of paision, or if, by a few hasty t , ;- presaions, be inanred in any manner, the charac ter and good fame of another—and shall a person not equally be liable in damages, where; by train of assiduous ettentions, he gains the heart- and affections of a yonng unsuspecting - femnle, and then, by Whim or caprice, or •any unfounded motive, 'deserts her, leaving her a prey to the intenseness of 'mental anguish, 'borne down, by the weight of Shaine, regret, and mortifiCa •tion, which must folloW the sudden destrectiola of hopes so long cherished and so artfully excited :?• Notwithstanding, a female in such circumstances may be the most innocent of persom, yet the very notoriety of the _adventure avast be regarded as a misfortune to her, both in a moral and patrimonial point of view, and there is a - certain degree of la bkdriunz inseparable from the idea of a young wo man having been jilted or deserted by' a men— and with the careless, the ,rash, the ignorant and uncharitable (that is the great majority of the *drlcl), heiei fnnZ to afford a pretence for-sus ,pifions ..of impropriety upon her part, and -,t.:C 411Sig, which it is as diffiCtlit to bear AS it is int possible to olyi:zte. The public contempt, how ever,-vvitli which the character of a male ilt has "at all times been received by civilised sociAy, at once spews the extent of crime has been att , tehed to a O•ah - iadtion of a sidurar nature to the present. Conrt•alteiled, in see far, the intniortitors of Lords Nei.!..ton and Woocihonsiec, as to find the. delentlef to the pursuer in 7001. of da; wages, a:r.l :a full expenses of process. f , YORK ASSIZES. KING V. FRANK AND OTHERS. PRICE OF STOC Bank Stock, 216 k 2181 219 Navy 5 per Cent. S9iV, Irisll 5 per Cent. 4 par Cent. 74 75 741 S per Cent. Red. 57411 2 per Cent. Cons. 57 571 56i Bank L. Atm 15 7-16ths3 India Stock, 165 . . LONDOI`4!. Printed liy THOMAS WOOD, of N 0.35, Maideu-lane, Covent-garden; and Published b WILLI.:L.M ARMIGF,H: seMITS, youth M01,6n-stieet, Grosvenor-squale (ii=ast paid ) 2 :l;ust. addressed. At the St;IN OEFICE, No. 112, Strand, vvl4erc d iduertisvnents, Ordeal for the Papa, Lettos fur the Editor, ei.Q. This,was an indictment against the defendant JohriTranii, Charles Mi llary, and RaEph ton ; all of Leeds, journeymen shoe-makers, for conspirin 1:2 cause William Fish, who was Asc.; a journeyman sltoe s maker, to be dismis - sed frotd his employment, Mr. .1.-I-Ar_DV Stated the case to the Jury ; he ob-'. ...,etved that some years ago an Act of I s arliament gave a Jegal existence to Friendly Societies; whieh, as they were originally constituted, were alike advantageous to those.- concerned in thent . and the public ; but, under the colour and pro-: tection of,these societies, others had arisen, of a • very different complexion, and of a most perni cious tendency, the object of which was, by week.; ly contributions, to. raise a fUnd for the purpose of obtaining an _increase of wages, .and was effected in this manner : when any Workmen :struck, that is,' 'gave over working ,to obtain an , i advance of wages, any particular town or dir triet, the persOns so out of employment were maintained by this fund 3 when'this object we 3 obtained, the workmen iu another, distriet struck in like manner, and received the like Support. It was for nonpayment to this fund that de- feadants had determined to remove W. Fish front Isis employment,_ wlticit they effected. by steeting; .to his employer, that if he did not dismiss hiat they would leave his service; which. induced his master to discharge him front his service, and the consequenee Was, that William Fish 'became chargeable to the township of Leedt; , who were' at the expense of the present prosecution. George Sharpe stated that he was a shoe=maker at Leeds, and generally employed about n ine journeymen ; the defendants had been employed • by him, find a person of the name of Willial Fish also worked for him. On the 26th of Junes Charle's Millary and Frank came to his shop, and told him they were determined to take in no more work until he had "turned Fish off. Witness told them they had better be quiet and work. Witness did not, inform them whether he could comply with their wishes or not; but he in fact discharged Fish in consequence of what they had said to him.—After he had discharged Mini. witness took some i work to Burniston, whoin• - • formed him he did not mean to take any more in- When witness inquired the reason, he said it was because he employed Fish. Witness, having in' formed him that he had discharged him, Burniston- • received the work as usual. Witness further stat' ed, that when Millary brought in the boots 11 demanded pay for them, and said he did not mean to take any more work until the business ,Was,,set , " tied with respect to Fish. Witness was neNt clayt sent for to a public-house, where he found the; defendants_ and six or .seven others ; they told him,they•had sent for him to. learn whether he meant to turn Fish off or not.—Witness told - them be had discharged him ; on ,which they es' pressed themselves satisfied,. and said they would - return to their work as usual. mei•ely stated the fact of his be ing discharged, and having applied to the parish' for•relicl, and that he was in arrears to the funi - ' Witness 'lipplied to the'parish in the first instance,/ without asking for work at any other shop. - The Judge asked some questions of Mr. Shat• as to the wttges that could .he earned in thebusi uess ; he said they must work toletably,sten.dy earn a gui a week. Itutir, said, he thought there was no cvi - ' deuce of. Buruistoa being in the conspiracy,_ Mr. Sharp lia4 , diSinisseic Fish before he had see' Burniston-; but hi.; Lordship thought his t on.::nz,"' ring in the same object, by refusiag to xvork til Fish should be discharged, and his pre' sent at the pnblid-house when the same (lcinana: was, tirade, was sufficient to rendOr him a party to the conspiracy. The Jury found all the defendants guilty, and they were sentenced to be imprisoned six months its YOrk Cartle. • On Vie.loth inst. the Lady of George Ackers; Esq. of Rug Park, Corie:lAoT.i,' of a Son and Heir. , ' • • M.Yltlt' E 1). On FrliVty kilt, at Aston,. Warwickshire,. Mr. Itich'ut Garlic, it Fiuol-l;iie, London, to Maly AnM, daughter Mr, John Terry, of Ashe.ted, near Birwinxhro. On Wedue , :.da, at. Mar:i-le , •bOune (March, Major Graba 11. of the Drzl4oon' Guards, to Maria r second daughter o• the late Lardutrt, Esq. of Hinde-streeii squar:. - • 3t 11, E y iron to Church, Cinsies Williams, Esq. to . Milt ,du tigLiet• of the late CtptitiM Met,.alle, thelloY44 Navy. at Tram, is Treland,, Edward Cary. Esq. Capta in in the Wexford•Miiitia, to. Aoiy, youagest daughter of th.. late lienry . ll , liitina.iii, Ez:l. of I.3Azt ,-, -place, near 'rautlton• DI Eli. ' 'On the 22d nit, at Brighton, in the 39th year of his 30 Mr. Jolla Waller, late of fluir-street, East Smithfield. On the :30*.:11 alt. in Ireland, Sir John l'arnell, Bart. the Od the 31st ult. at Greenock, Lewis Gellie, Esq. of Royal Navy, aged 93. He *:1,3 a native of Aberdeen, and oaf of the oldest Lieutenants of the 'Navy, b a ying served wits' Admiral Boscawen. Early on Saturday se'nnight, aged 21, Charier; Robert tro,d' son,tenth son of Mr. F. Hodman,Proprietor of the Cambridge •, On Saturday I.st, General Vallancey, one of the Vice Prr sidents of the Society. Lately; at Dalmarnock, Angus Stuart, aged 96. - „ S YES I'_44DAY. India Bonds, Old Ann. 574 Eicilcq. Bilis, 34d. per dal' par, 3s. 23. dig. 're.tto, aid. per day, 49. 69. Pr' Oraniarn, 21 3 (27 1 pr. Cons. fcr 2sth inst..s73il • HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE TO-MORRO W 'q Morning, 3 minutes after 7. I Evening, 3 2 minutes anti • ,