The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-03-20 00:00:00

. _
law— as It now stood, and moved that the bill be read a _
second time thst day Mt months.
After rem .rks from several hon, members, and in defer-
ence to the Attorney-Genesala appeal, Mr. Norwood 'mat-
te .ned the bill until May.
Mr. Monk moved tne second reading of the Revenue
Officer.' Bill. Ile explained that, by an act passed last year,
revenue officers were allowed to vote at elections for mem-
bers of Parliament but there were sti 1 penal enactments in
ex6imice which preveoted them from canveasing or becom-
ing members of an election committee, or attending and
addressing political meetings. The object of the bill was t,,
alter this state of things aid to allow Revenue officers to
exercise the franchise with the same freedom as other pep's.
Mr. Pease doubted the wii.lom of the step taken last year,
and altogether disputed the policy of allowing uthcers in the
employment of the Government to mix themselves up in con-
tested elections. He thought the House had gone quite far
enoogh in giving theta the simple power of recording their
vote, and he would move that the bill be read a second time
that day six months.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer seconded the amendment.
He said the whole question turned upon what were the duties
of the persons whose capacity of action the House were wanted
to enlarge. It was asked why the Revenue officers should be
differently treated front clerks in the Foreign Office and other
Government departments Ills answer was that it was because
they were revenue officers The vet y nature of their department
rendered It most impolitic that they should ndn themselves up
in political contests. The clerks in the Foreign Office were
entrusted with the collection of more than sixty millions of
revenue. That sum could not be collected by sitting in
Downing-street, but by going abroad, among the people,
and exercising a most inquisitorial jurisdiction over
them, by imposing annoying restrictions upon trade,
and by doing everything which, except for the pur-
p.,,e of collectir g the revenue, the constitution of the
country would disapprove. It wan most important that
the heads of the Revenue Department should have the
power of removal, but if this bill paused, the control of the
department over its officers would be weakened, because
they would be afraid to set for fear khat their conduct might
bit attributed to politicai motive, But givieg the Revenue
Don Lament It litical influence they would destroy its inde-
pendent character.
After remarks from Mr. Clay, Alderman Lusk. Mr. Russell
Gurney, and Mr. Craufurd, in support of the bill, and
from Mr. Liddell, Mr. Ayrton, and Mr. Henley, ill opposildoe
to it,
Mr. Gladstone said Parliament had established an Im-
portant principle in conferring the franchise upon mem-
bers of the Civil Service. The question was not a party one.
It haul been said that a majortt) of the civil servants voted
for Conservative candidates at the last election because they
Ii oked upon theta as having been distinguished for a long
series of years by great activity in the management of the
public finances. Ile was not aware whether this was true or
slot, but if it was true he was convinced that it was not a
source of strength but of weakness to the Conservative party,
because if It made one party weak with a particular clam it
made it strong with the station at large. Ile imputed no
dishonesty to the civil servants, and he denied that
any imputation of dishonesty was involved in iinposing
restraint in certain cases. Contractors were not allowed
to sit in Parliament not became ,11 p were dishonest, but
because it was impolitic to allow them to be placed in a
position where their honesty might he exposed to solicits,
ti,,, Ile urged that it would be most unwise to adopt
sims
principle involved in the bill, and sold he could not con-
template with satisfaction any proposal which might have a
tendency to introduce the Ainerican s>atenn with regard to
public abpollithlellle.
Mr. Monk having replied, the House divided, when the
.. 207

ni-W1•;ei;

For the second reading ..

Majority 119
The lall was accordingly rejected.
Mr Baines moved the second reading of the Libel Bill lie
rep! ,tired that it was intended to protect newspapers which
cave bean fide reports of public speeches, from actions for
libel, for matter contained in such speeches, provided no
malice could be proved ihainst them
After consider ble ii scu4sion, the debate was adjourned,
and when other business had been disposed of, the House
adjourned.

ACTION AGAINST A LADY FOR
BREACH OF PROMISE.
At Aylesbury, the cause of " Eden v. Ormond," his been
tried, and was an action for breach of promise of marriage.
It appeared that the plaintiff, who is a widower, 60
years of age, was formerly a farmer, and s now a
land.surveyor and general agent, at Slough, near
Windsor, and he brought this action against the de-
fendant hi recover damages for breach of her promise
to marry him. The defendant is s widow, about 40
years of age, and the daughter of a clergyman, and
it was said that she had an income of about £l.OO a
year. After the death of her husband, about three
years ago, she lodged with a Mrs. Todd at Wycombe,
and latterly at Reading. The first introduction
was at the Wargrave Regatta, and on that occa.
shin the defendant drove the plaintiff to the station
in her carriage, and at was arranged that the plain-
' tiff should viva her at Reading, which he iwcord-
ingly did. A closer Ultima y then sprang up be-
tween them, and at the 4lefeudant's request the plain-
tiff took lodgings at Reading, ant the defendant was I
introduced to his friends as his future wile, and they
subsequently visited I)xford and Monkey Island to-
gether. 1, p to October last things went smoothly,
but then Mrs. Todd appeared upon the scene, and it
was suggested that she hail some objects to gain by
the defendant remaining single. Be this an it mav,
the result was that, on the 15th of that month, the
defendant write to the plaintiff, stating that he was
quite mistaken in supposing that she ever intended
to marry him, and that his station in life was not suit-
able to hers. Much amusement was caused by Mr.
Merewether reading the defendant's letters to the
plaintiff, of which the following are a sample :
Portland-place, Reading, Sept. 6, 16,07.
My dear John,—l hope you will not think me unkind when
I ask you to postpone your visit to me for s week or two; for
I must tell you that on my arrival h re on Tuesday, after
spending such a truly delizhtful day tel Ji you at Slough, old
Mrs. Todd was very disagreeable at supper, asking where I
hail been, and the society I was in, PM% she should teaks it
her business to inquire, dm. I said nothing to her, hut re-
tired to rest very happily. She was gone to London the sent
morning when I canweilown, sent is to return this evening, I
believe, newt likely with a volubility of revenge, in words or
temper, with me, which I shall not regard the slightest; but
I wish to hear what she has to say. at all events. Therefore
I think, dear, I would rather write.to you again before you
Come. . . . I admire your tea a very much, and I think I
had better set them to music from a movement if Haydn's.
I ain going for a nice di i.e this evening, and I hope I shall
enjoy my airily:. You must accept my dearest love, and
every sincere with, and believe me, my dear Mr. Eden, ever
to rein tin your ever affect imate friend,
I I will write to you in a few days. God bless you.
November 4, 1867
My dear John,—l must write a line by the early post to
yogi to s .y how truly obliged I urn tor your nice cask of ale,
which arrived safe on Saturday It was very cousiderate o
you to think of me. I hive tapped it, and it is very Mee,
and I shad much enjoy It. . must now wind up
with my very dearest love to you, or if I hear enything to sty
ainstutage I will write to tell you I remain, dear Joko,
your affeethinate JANS. What a lovely morning it is; it
would just do for a Wee walk out to the Merry Maddens.—
Adieu. /Soy. IS, Mr,
My Dearest have just received your kind letter,
and am delighted to hear you have taken a house that you
think will suit its both. I have no news to tell you, only Ido
hope you will stick to poor me, for Old Mother Todd is more
inveterate than ever, but I am no sick of saying any more
about it I do hope you and I shall defeat the lot —Your
own Jays.
A number of other letters were written in the same
strain, and on the 11th October, 1868, the defendant
wrote as follows
Dear John,—All is right. hut it was useless writing to you
before I could see another house, as Cole's is really let, and
now I cannot ftud but one imitable one, and that •35 a year,
said the taxes about £5, making about £4O altogether, which
is just before you come to the cemetery, on the left hand
side ; hut the garden is too large hy half, but all very nice,
besides such a pretty little greenhouse; and I know one at
£lB, but that is up such a back street.
(hi the 15th October, 1868, four days after, the
defendant wrote the following letter, which was the
last the plaintiff received from her :-
3, Portiaml-place, Reading, Oct. 15, 1564.
Sir,—Your letter of yesterday has very much astonished me, I
as you must well know I never on any occasion gave you the
slightest reason to suppose I ever intended to contract •
marriage with you, as I never looked on you in that way.
Your position in life is by no means in a station suitable to
my own. This is the only and last reply I intend to give to
you. I return your carte, and will thank you to return my
letters, by return, as 1 never wish to meet.
JANE ORMOND.
Mr. Metcalf having addressed the jury for the de-
fendant, contending that the piaintiff's only object had
been to make money out of the defendant, his lorolahip
summed up, and the jury returned a verdict for the
plaintiff—damages £i3oo.

IMPORTANT CASE OF LIFE
ASSURANCE.
In the Court of Chancery on Saturday, before the
Lords Justices of Appeal, an appeal from a decision of
Vice-Chancellor Matins was heard.
The appeal VIM made by the British Equitable
Assurance Company, and the question was whether a
policy for £lOO upon the life of Mr. Bird, of Aberdare,
granted by the British Equitable Company was void
by reason of certain material facts as to the health of
Bird not having been communicated to the company
when the polity was granted. The policy had been
aasigned for value to the Great Western Railway
Company. The Vice-Chancellor held that the policy
was void, and the defendants appealed.
The application for the policy was made in June,
1863, and the usual questions were put and answered
by Bird. We ordinary medical attendant, Dr. Davies,
reported favourably of his health and Mr. Jones, who
acted for the company, examined Bird, and stated
that he considered his life a tint-class one, except
for the fact that he was very corpulent. The coins
pany, on the 19th of August accepted the proposal,
though at an extra rate of premium, on account of
Bird's full habit, and informed him that the premium
must be paid on or before the 9th September, and
that if any alteration in the state of his health had
taken place between the medical examination and the
actual payment of the premium, the policy would be
void unless such alteration was communicated to the
company, and the premium afterwards accepted by
them. On the Bth September the premium Was
paid, and the policy shortly afterwards handed over
to Bird. On the 17th August Bird had consulted
a Dr. White at Cardiff, who came to the conclusion
that he was suffering from Bright's diselve, and
told him that he was seriously ill, and also gave
him a prescription. He at terwards, however, was told
by Dr. Davies that he was of opinion that there
was nothing serious the matter with him. These facts
were never communicated to the insurance company.
On the 28th May, 1864, Bird died suddenly, and an
ii,quest was held on him, the verdict returned being
that he died of fatty degeneration of the heart. An
action having been commenced on the policy, the bill
suit was tiled.
Their Lordships were of opinion that Bird was bound
to communicate to the company the result of his con-
sulting Dr. White, and that, as he did not, the policy
was void, and the company were fully justified in re-
sisting payment. The appeal must be dismissed with
costs.

A Brcuyar, MURDY.I2.--A. murder has just been
committed at Ls BuissiCre, near Lisieux, France.
Three farm servants, named IlemCry, Vernon, and
Lecointre, had passed the evening together at a small
inn, which they left at a late hoar to sleep in a stable;
they were, however, afterwards heard quarrelling in
the street, and the next morning Hemery was found,
nearly dead, lying in a ditch. He had been kicked
with heavy shoes, and beaten with stones in a most
frightful manner : his skull was fractured, and his face
cut to pieces, so that he was Ficarcely recoguimble.
Some women who lived close by, and who had heard
the cries of the wounded man, declared that the others
must have continued their attack on him for a great
length of time. Vernon and Lecointre have been since
arrested, and confess their guilt, but the motive for the
mime ie uot known.