Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-07-27 00:00:00

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.-LINCOLN, July 24.

BREACH OF PRcJIISE OF MARRIAGE—YARNELL v. MOODY.
—This was an action for breach of promise of marriage,
in reply to which the defendlnt by his pleas had not only
denied the making of the promise, but had also alleged
that the plaintiff and defendant had mutually agreed to
exonerate each other from the performance of the promise.
Mr. Serjeant Hayes and Mr. Flowers were counsel for the
plaintiff; Mr. Macaulay, Q C., and Mr. Baden for the
defendant. The plaintiff, Elizabeth Yarnell, is a dress-
maker ht East Butterwick, about 34 years of age, and the
defendant, who is about 27 years old, now lives at Don-
caster, but until recently lived at East Butterwick, he
being captain and part proprietor of a bDat ply-
ing between the two places, and being in the habit
of going with his boat backwards and forwards from
one to the other. As long as about eight years ago
an intimate acquaintance had become established between
the plaintiff and the defendant, the latter of whom
was frequent in his visits to the foT mer, and not very par-
ticular as to the time of making them. Jane Yarnell, the
plaintiff's sister, living with her parents, at Bishop's Nor-
ton, deposed to the frequent visits of the defendant, at the
plaintiffs house, and also that Fhe had several times heard
him say that he intended to marry the plaintiff; that two
days had been fixed for the wedding—one in July, 1853,
and the other in April, 1855; but that on the days fixed
the defendant did not make his appearance. Maria Mid-
dleton, the plaiwiff's aunt, a widow, proved that the
defendant had once said that she should be the bride's-
maid, and no one else, and that she had actually bought a
dress and a bonnet on purpose for the wedding. That was
in 1853 ; and she had seen the plaintiff and the defendant
together as late as August, 1835, apparently on the usual
terms ; but that in December of that year he was married
to another lady at Doncaster. The following letters were
read as part of the plaintiff's case :

Doncaster, July 25, 1851.

My dear Elizabeth,—l ham awry to inform you we shall
not be home before munday or tuesday next. I receivei your
Letter which contained a many falsitys for I neither nursed
miss Glow nor purposed to walk with her and I hope my Dear
Elizabeth you will never believe that ever I said I was glad
you was found out, for I think I have reason to say as little
about that as yourself, so I hope you will not think no more
about that fer I cannot help what they say bat I shad not say
A deal more at present for it looks like rain we may be home
on Saturday so I shall conclude with my kiud lose to you and
all the family.—Your afFtctionate lover, R.

Say (lost thou doubt my love my truth
Or think my heart inclined for roving
0' no tis thine A heart of youth
Faithful to the and ever loving.
East Butterwiek Jan 2.

My Noun Dear Elizlbeth,—l hope You have got the worst
of the Row over but I have mine to coo yet. I havo not
heard any one say any chin, Amiss Pykett says that wee was
good blood to stair that old brusend gutted Deavil out as wee
did, bat I shall not say A deal at present if I ham to come
into your House by daylight please to let me know some way
or another for I doret not at any other time I lay the blame
upon myself for your stairing it out I was not there.—Your
.affectionate lover R. MOODY.

I was at Thorne on sunday so if you rote I received no
Letter. Adue god bless you. Dear Dear Elizabeth if I ham
ever to come into your House any more after this time please
tell me for I should very much like to know your mind.—l ham
still the same yours for ever.

Doncaster, April 29, 65.
My dear Elizaheth,—l received yours this ram-fling and was
glad to hear from you but not about you going away. I think
you might have said where you was going too but that is
something you dont-whant me to know you talk about the
sight of money p!easing me but the sight of you my love
pleases me much better but I have never had one with money
nor without sin I came to see you but I hown I have not acted
as I hote to have don.to you but have you done so to mo. I
do not know anything to the contray but you and God knows
weather you have or not but if wee are cot to go together I
hope God wil forgive us and if we shou'd never meet no more
upon hearth I hone we shall meet in heaven. I can look
back and think of the happy hours nay days and nights wee
have spent together but have they come to an hencrat last.
I ric ver yet intended having any one else but you my dear
dear Elizabeth but you say we must part but as you have
another ready you will care but little about that. I cannot
get home before tuesday but I must conclude it will soon be
post time so no more at, present from your loving R. M.
Mr. 'Macaulay, on the part of the defendant, denied
that the defendant had ever made any promise of marriage,
but he had unfortunately, when he was only about 18,
contraeted an improper intimacy with the plaintiff, which
she herself had terminated in April, 1855. The expres-
sions in the letters referred to an intimacy of that sort,
and not to any promise of marriage ; and it was very
remarkable that if a day in April, 1855, had been fixed
for the marriage, and the defendant had failed to make
his appearance, no allusion to the subject should have
been made in the letter of the 29th of that month.
The defendant's aunt, who lived next door to the plaintiff
at Butterwiek, was called, and proved that the defendant
used to visit the plaintiff at night, and that one morning
after he had been there all night his fat her and uncle came
after him, and the plaintiff denied that he was there,
but that he was discovered concealed in a closet. Another