The Press.
London, England, 1858-08-14 00:00:00

Maio an Volta.

D.INGEROUS WIDOW.
A•r the Guildford assizes on Monday, Mrs. Gordon
brought an action for breach of promise of marriage
against Mr. Woo'ridge, a chemist, of Holborn and
the New•road.

Mr. Sergeant BALLANTINE, in opening the case, said
that the plaintiff was a widow, and that the intimacy
between the parties first c immenced in the year 1856,
at which time the plaintiff had been a widow six or
seven years, and she had one child, a girl, about seven
years old. He was not aware exactly of the nature
of the plaintiff's moons, but he did not believe that
the slightest imputation emit' be cast upon her cha•
racter. She was about thirtylour or thirty five years
old. He was not able to make out clearly how the
connection first took place, but lie believed that the
plaintiff having gone to the shop of the defendant
to have some prescription made up, an intimacy at
once sprung up between them which ripened into
affection, and ended in the defendant desiring to
make the plaintiff his wife. He need hardly remind
the jury that pi otnises of marriage are nut always
made in positive and distinct terms, and the defend-
ant, in the letters he had written, had undoubtedly
been very guarded in his expressions ; but when
they looked at the correspondence they would say, as
reasonable men, whether any other conclusion could
be come to than that the defendant intended that the
plaintiff should become his wile, and that his letters
contained matter that amounted to a promise to that
effect.
The learned counsel then read portions of some
letters written by the defendant to the plaintiff.
They all commenced "Dear Annie," but were couched
in very general, ambiguous terms, referring to the
excitement he had sustained during some of their
interviews, and one of them referred to a request he
had made to her, to which he said she had returned
the monosyllable " No," and asked her whether she
persevered in that answer. It also appeared that
upon one occasion the plaintiff lied gone down to
Gosport, and the defendant accompanied her to the
railway station, and upon the next occasion, when
the defendant wrote to her, he expressed his regret
that lie was not with her during the journey, par-
ticularly the latter part of it, when he said they
should probably have been aloue in the carriage, and
the " shades of evening " approaching; and this
letter concluded by stating that the plaintiff had
given hint a parting gift in the shape of a" blossom"
on his under lip. The learned sergeant pioceeded to
state that there could be no doubt that for a very
considerable time the parties were on the most inti-
mate and affectionate terms; but, he said, towards
the latter end of 1857 the defendant's letters became
shorter and cooler every time he wrote, and at length ,
on the 27th of February in the present year, the de-
fendant wrote a very extraordinary document on a
slip of paper, in which he stated that lie had put
" this and that" together, and that he could not see
the advantage of effecting that which was a mere
form, and asking the plaintiff whether this was not
her own opinion upon the same subject. The inti-
macy, he said, was thus broken off between them,
and the plaintiff had no alternative but to bring the
present action to obtain redress in the shape of
damages from the defendant for the breach of his
promise to make her his wife.
Evidence was then adduced to show that the
defendant used to come and visit the plaintiff
generally twice a week, on Wednesdays and Sundays,
while she lived for eight weeks in Gerrarlstreet,
Soho, and that sometimes he used to take tea with
her and remain till ten or eleven o'clock at night.
He seemed as though he was going to make her his
wife. (A laugh.) What she meant by that was that
when he went away from her lie used to appear very
affectionate, and used to kiss her. She thought
the old gentleman was Mrs. Gordon's sweetheart.
(Laughter.)
Madame VALBERT, a Frenchwoman, said she lived
in Wardour-street, and the plaintiff lodged with her
fifteen months ago. She was in her house six or
seven months, but she did not know where she catne
from. The defendant used to visit her twice a week
—on Sundays and Thursdays. She was not visited
by any other gentleman.
By Mr. JAMES : There were no other lady lodgers
in her house. A lady and gentleman occupied the
second floor.
CHARLES LEAKE, who proved the defendant's hand•
writing, stated on cross-examination that about this
time last year, in consequence of a note front the
plaintiff, he went to her lodgings in Foley.place ;
when she told him that there had been an improper
connection between herself and the defendant, which
she had permitted because she could make nothing