The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-04-27 00:00:00

A CLERICAL BREAM OF PROMISE CASE.

I • In the Court of Exchequer on Friday a breach of promise
case was tried. The plaintiff was Miss Alicia King daughter
of Mr. John Bing, a surgeon, csrryieg on business at Ample-
forth, a village i etr York ; and the defendant is Mr. Jahn
Edward Welburn, an undergraduate of St. Catherine's
College, Cambridge, and son of the Rev Mathew Welburn,
incumbent of Nether Poppleton, a village a few m les from
Ampleforth. Miss Lucy King, a younger sister of theplaintiff,
plaintiff slid that the plaintiff' and defendant had been
long aequa'nted, Mr. Welburn having been curate of Am-
aleforth before he was presented by the Archbishop of
York, in the course of lest year, to the living of Poppleton.
Defendant became very persevering in his attentions to
her sister, and frequently walked out with her. He
proposed to hoe sister, and having beim accepted, it
was arranged that the marriage should tale thee in
London. He gave her a ring, which he requested her to
wear. The proposal was made on the Ist of January,
1856, and the marriage was to take place io May. It was
eubeequently postponed until October. In the early part of
Octoteer her sister went to London, dad witness followed
a few days aftetwards to officiate as bridesmaid. Every
pr/ovation was made, except the wedding dress, which
the defendant promired to buy in Loradea. When witness
arrived in London she fennd bee :deter in a very agitated
state, in consepence of not having received any answer'
to two letters she had addressed to the defendant at
Cambridge. A surgeon and a physician Were called
in to attend her. The wedding never took
Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers: The defendant maelee
his prop isal of marriage to her sist,r on the Ist of
January, 1856, and he then presented her with a ring. He
suggested that they should be married in May, but the
ma*riage was afterwards deferred until October. Her
sister wee wanly 25, and the defendant was about 22. He
was of age when he made the proposal to her sister. She
frequently say the lettere which her sister wrote
to the defendant. She knew Mr. Welburn, the
former curate of Ampleforth, who bed five sons
nd daughters. Margaret Welburn was about the same
age as her sister, and was a very nice girl, but she
did not invite her to the wedding in London.
Her father keew that she and her sister were going to
Leaden to meet the defendant. It had °fon been said by
the defendant that his father and mother knew all about •
the proposed marriage. When they came to town they
re.ided at 26, Tachbrock street, Pimlico. When the
match was broken off, her sinter took a place as govere
ness, and then went home, not being able to perf Irm the
duties. During the time they lived in Tachbroek street
their brother lived at No. 108, in *e same street. He took
the lodgings for them. Mr. John King said he was a
surgeorf at Ampleforth. Mr. Welburn, the father of the
defendant, was fir some years curate of Ampleforth. I(V
had known that there was an intimate acqeaintence be-
tween the defendant and his daughter. Defendant wrotei
to him, asking his censent to the marriage, but witness
wrote to him to say that he could not consent to the mar-
riage until he knew something of defendant's circumstances.
His reply was satisfactory. At a subsequent interview
witness suggested that the circumstances should be men- .
tioned to defendant's father and mother, but defendant
said that would be of n ► use, as they knew all about it. He
added that the marriage was to take place in London in
October. Crcss-examined by Mr Chambers : He had not •
always bean prosperous, and was bankrupt in 1817. He
made himself loankrupt to get rid of several swindles, and
gave up all his property, He couldn't have given his daugh-
ter anything on her marriage. He went to see Mr Welburn
at Poppleton, and stayed there several hours. They went
to see the church, and Mr Wellearn remarked that he had
made many a pound by people coming there to be buried
—it was such a nice place. (Laughter.) Mr. Knowles :
De you know that the defendant's father is a man of pro-
perty ? Witness: Yes—of very considerable property.
Mr. Chambers : That is false. Baron Watson : Yon have
no right to make such a remark, Mr. Chambers. Mr.
C aambers : I was insenueted to say so, in case such evidence
was given. Baron Watson : You had no right to say so. -
Witnees: Mr. Welburn is a man of very considerable
property, bat he is a miserly, penurious man. Mrs
Garman Kieg, the brother of the plaintiff; proved
that he took lodgings for the ladies by direction of the
defendant, who told hiin when they areived to send down
the address to Cambridge. Dr. Finchate was caled to
prove the nature of the indisposition of the plaintiff while
in London. There was no defence to the action, and after
counsel on both sides had addressed the jury,Baron Wate
summed up the evidence. The jury found a verdict for
the plaintiff Damages', £5O.