The Sun.
London, England, 1855-06-01 00:00:00

i.
i~~~~~ ~~' <~

S,,

C~


;"

}'

INTELLIGBNCE.—May 31.

CO CTRT OF COMMON PLEAS.
BREACH OF PROXISE OF MARRIAGE.—EVANS v, sCOTT.
This was an action for breach of promise of marriage,
foundSe9rPahiiiad thesEhvipanui'l'cler,
brought by Mise
merchant in the Russia trade, against the defendant, a
son of an iron- i
nd
Scotland.daughter of a
The
facts will be found in the f • edof the ' 1
su owe outline •
evidence.
Mr: Serjeant Wilkins and Mr. Slegg were ceurrsellot
the plaintiff. No one appeared on behalf of the defendant.
Mrs. Mary Ann Evans--I am the mother of the
nlaiettff, Sophia Evans. She is 24. I know the de-
fendarlt, Andrew Scott. He is his father's agent, who
is an !iron-founder and shipbuilder, in Scotland. He is
about '33. My late husband was a merchant in th •
Russia trade. Defendant's brother, John, married e
my -
daughter, Susannah, in 1851. Defendant before that - -
time told' me he wished to marry Kophy, and that it
should take place the same day his brother was married.
I siiid I would rather net. I thought one marriage at a -
time was sufficient. I added I would write to my son,
who is a civil engineer in India, and ask his consent.
When I afterwards gave my consent defendant appeared
very much delighted. Defendant wrote to my son for
his consent, which he obtained. During 1851 and 1852
he visited my daughter every day, and drove us fre-
quently out in his phaeton. Their marriage was fixed
ter the 10th of February, 1852. Wedding dresses, &c.,
were prepared. The marriage did not take place,
I ecause no notice whatever was taken of it by defendant.
He was then lodging at Brixton. My daughter went
with me to Paris in 1852. Defendant •promised to
come to us there at Christmas. He did not not come.
Be corresponded with her and made her presents. He
became less attentive about a month before we left for
the Continent. [A long correspondence was put in and
read, but there was nothing particularly interesting in
it. It concluded by defendant's saying, "he would re-
lieve the plaintiff from her engagemen,.l Her spirits
were mach affected, and she is still debilitated. After
he broke off the engagement he wrote, demanding back
his letters and somethings he had left with my daughter.
They were not delivered up. In March last a person
calling himself a Bow street officer came to the house to
demand back defendant's letters and presents. • He came
three times. :I saw the .defendant . outside while the
officer was in the house. I demanded his authority. As.
he had none to show he was sent out of the house.
Miss. Maria Evans—l am sister of plaintiff. At the
time of my sister Susannah's marriage with defendant's
brother, defendant told me he intended to ask Sophia to
marry him. He was constant in his atterance after-
wards until my mother and sister went to Paris. I agree
with my mother as to the effect of breaking off the mar-
riage orimy sister's health.

. _
Mr. gooper, an accountant, deposed that he was pre-
sent at a conversation between Mr. Atkinson, the plain-
tiff's attorney, and the defendant. Mr. Atkinson said it
was a very disgraceful thing to send an officer to ladies,
who were unrrotected, on the charge of stealing trinkets,
and demanded the name of the officer. Defendent
Aron i4ed to give the name in two days. He did not do so.
Mr. Atkinson gave up to defendant his presents to Miss
Evans, and defendart gave a receipt for them. I know
plaintiff, and believe she has seriously suffered in health
in consequence of defendant's conduct.
Miss Emma Newman—l remember a man coming to
Mrs. Erns' house, and stating he was a Bow-street offi-
cer. He said he had come for some articles belonging
to Mr. Scott, which Mr. Evans had. He said he would
search the house, and take Mrs. Evans and her daughter
into custody if they did not give the things up. His
authority was demanded, and the door locked upon him,
when he did not produce it. After that he continued,
with other persons, to knock at the door.
Mrs. A. Robinson deposed that a lady had lately been
in the habit of visiting defendant at his office, and that
defendant had told witness he was married to her.
This, with the correspondence, which was read at
length, being the plaintiff's case,
Mr. ustice Williams summed up, and the jury re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff. Damages, 5007.

RETURN OF HER )114 TESTY THE QUEEN
FROM OSBO RIVE.

SOUTHAMPTON, MAr 31.
Her Majesty, his Royal Highness Prince Albert, the
Royal children, and suite arrived at Southampton en
route to London, from Her Majesty's marine residence
at Osborne this afternoon at 3 o'clock, in the Royal
steam-yacht Fairy, Captain the Hon. Joseph Denman,
accompanied by the Elfin tender. The weather was
as disagreeable as it could possibly be, and the Royal
party landed during a heavy fall of rain. It was not
until within an hour of her Majesty's arrival that the
Royal intention was made known to the dock and rail-
way officials at this port, and almost before the necessary
preparations were completed the Fairy hove in sight,
and was quickly alongside the dock quay, upon which
the Royal carriages were arranged. As soo❑ as Her
Majesty an I suite had disembarked the Royal train pro-
ceeded to London at half-past 3 o'clock, amid enthusi-
astic cheers. The Ro% al party consisted of Her Majesty
his Royal Highness Prince Albert, their Royal High-
nesses the Prince of Wales, the Princess Royal, Prince
Alfred, the Princesses Alice, Helena, and Louisa, Prince
Arthur and Prince Leopold, and their Serene Highnesses
the Princess of Hohenlohe Langenburg, and the
Princesses Adelaide and Feodore of Hohenlohe. The
Royal suite comprised the Marchioness of Ely, the Hon
Miss Seymour, Major-General the Hon. Charles Grey,
Vie Master of the Household, Major-General Buckley,
and Mr. Gibbs. The Queen wa4 received on the part
of the South• Western Railway Cantiany by Messrs.
Scott, Watkins, and Beattie, the principal officers of
that line, and by Messrs. Hedger, Giles, and Levy, the
principal officers of the .Sout"ampton Dock Company.
The Hon. Charles Grey, by desire of Her Majesty, con-
veyed to the dock officials her- approbation of the
arrangements which had been made for her reception at
so short a notice.

obtained upon thew;
heard, went to Mr. 4.00d5. The goods, I have since
Cole. There was another parcel for
4551. 4si lid. that was given up.' Two parcels of goods from Pickford and to the amounts of 1,7191. and
3461., .were also received, and part -of them went to
Ogilvie and. Co.; Of 'Liverpool. Ido not,kiaew what be-
came of the- remainder. 7 There
were' other goods ob-
taMed of different tradesmen in May,
upon which ad-
vaoces were obtAined frotti time.tb time.
Mr. Ballantine—Did Davidson and Gordon haVe any
correspondent at-Calcutta-I
Witness—We used to receive letters from India, and
used to send gotids to those parties through a London
house. Hoffman was the name of the house, and be
made advances upon these goOde.
' Mr. Edwin James said—With reference to .these dis-
counts, which took place after October, 1853, they do
not refer to the metal warrants, as they were connected
with-previous transactions, and it was under that impres-
sion that Mr. Chapman said they had no dealings with
the bankrupts after October, 1853, but immeiately
upon leaving this court on a former occasion he wrote
to Mr. Linklater, expressing a wish to correct his evi-
dencb with regard to these discounts.
Mr. Bailantine unde stand from the clerk of
the curt that it wilt be necess.,ry to prove the proceed-,
ings in bankruptcy. The witness who will be able to do _
that is at present many miles from here, but on a subse-
quent occasion I shall be able to produd.e him.
The prisoners were then remanded.