The National Register.
London, England, 1820-03-20 00:00:00

SENT LENT ASSIZES.

CIVIL SIDE.
(Before the Lord Chief Baron and Special Juries.)
Tor: KING V. GARDENLE.
This was an int;,rniation filed by the Attorney Gene-
ral against the defendant, fur assaulting and obstructing
Thomas Ilainstead, a mariner of the Severn, in the ex-
ecution of his duty, whilst searching for contraband
goods, at Deal, on the 13th of August last.
The case went to the Jury tinder the Learned Judge's
directions, and they found the defendant Guilty.
TKE KING V. HICKSON, SHEA?, AND WADDELL.
These were similar prosecutions against the defen-

dams.
The cases went to the Jury under the Learned Judge's
directions, and they found the defendants all Guilty.
BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.
RICHARDS V. PUGH.
This was an acttun by the plaintiff fur the breach of
a marriage promise entered into with her by the defen-

dant.
Mr. Gurney, with whom was Mr. Chitty, stated the
plaintiff's case.
The billowing is an outline of the circumstances:—
The plaintiff was a young laity of considerable personal
beauty and mental endowments, and one of the ten
children of a respectable surgeon and apothecary, resid-
ing at Seale, near Seven Oaks, in this county; the
defendant was a widower with two children, carrying
on business at Sheerness as a linen-draper. The platn-
lllrs ace was stated to be 27, and that of the defendant
35 years. In the month of July, 1818, during the elec-
tion contest, which took place on Penington Heath, the
defendant happened to meet with the plaintiff, for the
first time, and was nit the instant struck with hcr per-
sonal charms. She was in company with her brother
and a young lady, named Pyne; he took occasion to fall
into conversation with her, as it should seem uninvited,
the subject of their discourse being the merits of the then
candidates for election. There the acquaintance seemed
to stop, hut at the end of eight or ten days afterwards,
as was stated by the plaintiff's brother and her mother,
lie came over to Seale, called at her father'e house, and
without any prefatory introduction he proffered his hand
in marriage to Miss Richards, and required to know
what portion it was in her father's power to bestow upon
her. He was informed that the whole of her fortune
wascomprehentied in her person; upon which he dis-
claimed the idea of all pecuniary considerations, said he
was enamoured of her person, and represented that he
Was in a very flourishing way of business, and possessed
besides 7001. per annum, independent property, and
was extremely anxious that the connubial knot should
be tied forthwith, and that his wishes should be commu-
nicated to the young lady. At that time Miss Richards
was on a visit with some friends in Sussex, and her pa-
rents immediately communicated to her the offer that
had been made. In the mean time the defendant ad-
dressed a letter to the lady in rather familiar terms,
tendering her his hand and fortune, and requiring her,
if disengaged, to bless hint iii a matrimonial alliance.—
The young lady returned to her father's house, and
wrote the defendant a letter from the dictation of her
father, giving him to understand that his addresses
would not be discouraged. Immediately afterwards the
defendant again came over to Seale, and spent two whole
days in the young lady's company, during which he was
extremely anxious for the immediate consummation of
his happiness, but not being then out of mourning for
hit late wife, she objected to so hasty a proceeding, but
contented, at his urgent request, that the day of solem-
nisation should not be postponed beyond the ensuing
Christmas. In the mean time, however, he made it a
condition that he should have the happiness of writing
to her, and that she Should answer his correspondence.
He then took his leave, after having bespoken one of
her sisters to act as bride's maid at the nuptials, which
were axed on all hands to take place about Christ-
mas. Between the time of his departure, which was
about the undone of August until die month of Decem-
ber, when the match was broken off, a most affectionate
and ardent epistolary aorrespontience was kept up be-
tween the lovers, but towards the end of the year the.
i
defendant's letters altogether ceased, when, n .conse-
qUCIICC of a desire es:Kessed by the father to know the
cause, he retitrval for answer, that his views towards
Miss Richards were completely mistaken, that he had
never contemplated ally thing more than the happiness
of correspetidang with a woman of education and senti-
ment, and that nothing was farther from his intention
than marriage. In consequence of this surprising inti-
mation, a professional vialentati was consulted, who
wrote to the defendant 011 the subject of his promise to
the plaintiff, and in answer to that letter he assigned asa
reason for his conduct, that AI iss Richards had in one of
her recent letters intimated to him that a younger and
snore worthy rival tll.Ol the tit fetidAlll, had been paying
her cons.derable ant miter, had praised her beauty, and
that she dint hied her ',tower to resist his Milan tunnies to
bestow her band and bee it talent hum—Thew were the
most prominent circumstances of the case on the part of
the plaintiff. A whittle of the defendant's letters was
Olen in et Menet:, and as usual on such occasioas, their
contents produced a visible effect upon the ramble nitis-
ties of the whole court of auditors. It appeared that
the dekndant had never seen the plaintiff more than
twice in ills life.
Mr. Adolphus, for the defendant, :addressed the Jury
with great ability and eloquence, on behalf of his client.
The Chief iiiroll :11.1111111e11 tip the case for the Jury,'!
and told them, it had been admitted on the part of the
defendant the piauniii o as entitled to a verdict, and that
the question 01 Jautages iv.is peculiarly for their cousi•
derattein under all the circumstances of the case.
Thc Jury retired for about half an hour, and returned
verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 7001.