The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1861-01-22 00:00:00

Legal.

BREACH OF FROMM OF M 4 RRIAGE.

TRICILIR e. VON Hottrr—ln the Exchequer Court,
last week, before Mr. Berea Brunwell.—This was an
action for damages arising out of an alleged breach of
promise of marriage. Mr. Edwin Jaines, in opening the
case, stated that the plaintiff is • respectable young
lady, residing with a brother-in-law, Mr. Stains, •
gentleman ve.-y well known as a tutor to young
gentlemen pi-, paring for the military profession. Miss
Tricker was 21 years of age, and the daughter of a
ijentlemau in Ease:, and ilefeudaut was a gentleman of
very considerable skill in the musical world, and carry.
int on his profession in the neigliourhood of Worcester,
and the son of • gentleina well known in the musical
world residing in Loudon. In the phraseology of love,
Mr. Van Hoist was smitten with her charms, and was
particularly anxious for an early marriage. The first
letter which he (the learned counsel) would read was
dated Fel,. 5, 1860, the address being No. 9, High-
sireet, Worcester. He comments& "My own dearest
Fanny," and was extremely expressive in its tone of
tenderness. He prombied that as soon as his uniform
as a rifleman woo ready lie would send her his portrait,
end he concluded by designating the young lady u
"Sweirteat pet, yours most lovingly." In another letter
he styled himself " Your affectionate loved and future
husband." It appeared from tho further atatement of
the learned counsel that after Mr. Staines had prepared
the wedding dresses for his sister and wade the arrange-
ments, the defendant broke off the eugagement on the
ciiiind of incutupatibility of temper, but there had nut
any duisension between them, not even that
which was auteused to give a little interest to lure,
SU, " • lover's cmarrel."—Mr. Richard Staines said
be WY • military tutor. Ilia seterin-law was 22
yesse of age. Her parents are dead. In January.
1860, elm resided at liis house. The defendant was in
the habit of visiting at her house. In February
last defendant showed great stuchniont to the
plaintiff, and he spoke to his sister-m.l,w. The defend-
ant *rite to witness and an interview tea ulace be-
tween them. The defendant told hint of his attaehuient
to his sister, said he had CAM ••year, and that the
moment he was married it would be increased. He
wanted the marriage to take place uium,iieilmstely. but
witness thought there was no need of so mach precipi-
tation. After tl.at he became the accepted suitor of
isis sister-in-leer, and it was arranged that the marriage
should take place in the midauminer vacation. Shortly
afterwards the defendant returned to Worcester, and
cawe back to the Volunteer Review in Hyde Park. He
again visited at witness's house. and there Met no change
in his conduct. At that time preparations had been
made for the wedding. The defendant was to provide
the wetiOing dress. Defeuchint ceased to visit at his
house, and his sister showed him a letter she hail re-
ceived from hiin doted August 8, 1860, breaking off the
marriage on the ground of incompatibility of temper
and expressing an opinion that she would never be happy,
in • dull provincial town, at tic some
time highly eulogising her goodness and amis.
hility. The letter was answered by the witness,
who denounced the defendant's conduct as un-
handaome, umuanly, awl cruel, and informed
him that the isetter would be Hued in professional
hands.—Croas-ex•ulined by Mr. Huildleatune, Q.C.—
The parties lad known each other about a fortnight
when defendant spoke to witneas about the marriage.
Ile knew that the principal (tart of defeutlant's income
arose from teaching music in the neighbourhood of
Worcester and Malvern. He did nut know that the
defendant bad been involved in difficulties, nor had he
any reauu to suspect so until within the last few daye.
Mr Huddiestone raised a legal difficulty, namely, that
there was no breach, the defendant buying simply
asked to be absolved, and the lady not having answered
the letter, except by • writ —Mr. J•t••• thought that
was a very good answer. (Lauglikr.)—Mr. Huddle-
atone, in addressing the jury for the defence, contended
that there was no breach of promise, and that all that
the defendant had done was to say, " I repent of my
lurgain—pray let ins off." Nome o refusal to marry
lad been made out. The learned counsel also urged
that it had not been proved that the defendant had
been paying his addresses to any other lathy. Verdict
for tb• plaintiff, damages L'2s.
TUX MeV. J. BOJIWKLLee CAU.—The case of the
Rev. James lionwell, incumbent of St Philip's,
Stepney, who is under sentence of deprivation by the
Dean of the Court of Arches, will come before the
Judicial Committee of Privy Council at the sittings
which will be held at the close of Hilary Term. In
the event of then lordships unarming the decision of
1 the Court of Arches, Mr. Hunwell will cease to be •
! clergyman of the Church of England. and his balletic*
I will revert to the patrons, the principid and fellows of
I Haimow Co*" Othrd.