The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1871-03-25 00:00:00

wee—k aiterwards,

etha receipt of the defendant's letter untlin
though she lives within a mile of witneu's house.

This was the plaintiff tease.

Mr. ilulwer addressed the jury, admitting the promise to
marry, but contended that he had been released on account
of nine.; but the plaintiff had got into the hands of an
attorney who would go on with the proceedings. lie called
On them to believe that the letter Mr .hard had spoken
of, and the envelope of which was missing, was reCaiVad by
lr 01lard on the I hal, and comniudeated to the plaintiff
on the same day. 'lv. tiulwer called
- --•

- - --
John 11 esker r, the de'endant, who appeared with a reepl.
rator under 116 chin, and apparently could hardly speak loud
enough to make himself heard at any but a very moderate
distance. Ile admitted the acquaintance with the plaintiff,
and stetting tier at Canterbury, but denied that she left her
situation at his request ihe did leave, however, and went
home to I pweti It he had got better he might have married
her. Was suffering from consumption. nu the 20th of
April, IS7O, at the Great Northern Station at Peterborough,
whither he had gone to meet her at her requeat, he told her
that the state of hi. health would preclude hie carrying on
the correepondence on the lame terms aa before. Ilia health
has been gradually getting worse for some time past. Was
• travelling draper in • small way. ills Income hurt year
did not amount to C7O The house was him daughter's :
built with money left by her mother's family. Witness, paid
no rent, and the furniture and stock in trade were lite. In
all had no mite than sufficient to pay his creditors The
money received for the life-policy had been absorbed in the
bu,bese.
_ . . .

His Lordship, In summing up, said it was clear the promise
was male, and that a reasonable time had elapsed, awl they
might dismiss that from their minds. Then the defendant
set up a plea that the plaintiff was not ready and willing t
marry him, and it was sought to be maintained in a way he
had never witnessed before in a court of justice. The question
was whether he had Battened them thot he had made the pro-
posal ti marry her before the writ was Issued, which was on
the 20th of January. The question was whether the letter
addressed be Mr. 011ard was communicated to the plaintiff
before the 2,th of January. The only two persons who
could e abash the truth In that matter, Mr I illard and the
plaintiff . had both dented it, and lilt was so communicated
Mr. oilard must have committed a series of perjuries so cir-
cumstantial In their character as would drive him for
ever from society, and the lady, too, must either have delibe-
rately perjured herself, or been most lamentably and grossly
deceived, lied he his lordship , received such a letter as that be
should hare thought twice before he showed it to a young
lady at all. II ot lordship commented strongly against the
defendant, passing some severe atrictutes upon his conduct
If, however, the jury were el opMlon that the letter of the
defendant was communicated to the plaintiff, and she de-
literately refused to marry this man before the writ was
Issued, they should find for the defendant, subj oet to a 41.11.
Mon he should reserve for the Court al, ,ye. if they found
for the plaintiff the damages most be In accordance, as near
as they could form an opinion, with the defendant's circum-
stances. It was hnr the jury to consider whether there was
anything in defendant's plea with regard to his health, and
take that also into consideration.

The jury retired, and after an abe,nce of about half
an hour returned into court with a verdict for the
plaintiff—Damages, £3OO.