The Sun.
London, England, 1864-04-01 00:00:00

➢IARRIAGE,

In this case the plaintiff, Mies Blanche Rowlinson, the
daughter of a merchant in Liverpool, sought to recover
damages from Mr. W. G. Gordon, for breach of promise of
marriage, The plaintiff is 23 years of age, and the defen-
dant 27. The plaintiff and defendant became acquainted
when the latter was employed in an office in Liverpool.' He
paid the plaintiff great attentions, but he never made any
proposal of marriage. He subsequently obtained a situation
at Hankow in China, from which place he wrote a long
letter to plaintiff's father, confessing his love for the plain •
tiff, and soliciting permission to pay his addresses to her.
In this he enclosed a most passionate love letter to the
plaintiff, Both Mr. Rowlinson and the plaintiff replied to
these letters, each agreeing to the defendant's wishes. The
defendant after this wrote numerous letters to the plaintiff,
in which, in true lover's terms, he constantly alluded to
their marriage, and spoke of his parents being agreeable to
the engagement. He also said that he had saved £3,000,
which ho would settle on the plaintiff, and that he would
soon be a partner in the ,firm of his employers. He also
described how he was furnishing a house for her, and men-
tioned a variety of details as to her outfit, and the arrange-
ments he thought best for her journey to China. He spoke
also about everybody at Hankow and Shangai being aware
of his proposed marriage with her. This correspondence
commenced in June, 1861, but in August, 1862, the defen-
dant wrote to the plaintiff to the effect that the marriage
would have to be delayed, as his parents objected to the
marriage. He also said that he intended returning to
Europe to see his parents on the subject. His letters
after this gradually cooled, and he finally wrote to Mr.
Rowlinson, returning the plaintiff's letters, and breaking
off the engagement. He gave as his reasons for this act
the opposition of his parents to the marriage, and the
uncongeniality of his disposition and the plaintiffs.

The damagea were laid at £lO,OOO.
The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages,
£750.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE----Yesterday,

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.—FLAGRANT CASE OF
POLICE TYRANNY.—Eliztbeth Wilson, a respectable-

looking young woman, residing at No. 6, Great Exeter-

street, tisson•grove, was charged batore Mr, Arnold with
being a common prostitute, and annoying male passengers

in the street.

Mr. Edward Lewis, of Groat Marlborough-street, ap-
peared for the young woman. .

. . _.,
The case was partly heard on Tuesday, resumed yester-
day, and concluded to-day, and the greatest interest seemed
to be felt in the matter, the court being much crowded.
Woilard, 129 D, said —At two o'clock on the morning of
Tuesday last I was in Oxford-street; and saw the prisoner
take hold of gentlemen's arms, and heard her say to one of
them, "Come home with me." I then tok her into cus-
tody. I have repeatedly seen her in the street.
By Mr. Lewis—Late in the evening. I cannot say the
dates, but this month, I spoke to the second gentleman.
He die not give me his name and address. I then thought
I was justified in taking her into custody. I heard her ask
the gentleman whether he would go home with her. I
said, " There are great complaints of prostitutes annoying
gentlemen, and I shall take you to the station ;" and did so.
I did not in Marylebone• lane say, "Now you may go."
She did not say to me, " No ; you have called me a prosti-
tute, and I will go with you."
Mr. Arnold—You say you have repeatedly seen her in
the street, When was the last time before this ?—Con•-
stable—l think on Sunday night, between eleven and
twelve. She was then going towards the Marble Arch.
I have seen her walking backwards and forwards in Oxford-
street. I have seen her out as late as 1 o'clock in the fore
part of this month.
Thomas Berridge, 295 D—l have seen the prisoner in
Oxford-street at 11, 12, and 1 o'clock, always walking with
different men, and a quarter or half hour at a time.
Mr. Wilson, of 6, Exeter-street, Lisson-grove, said—The
young woman is my daughter, and a professional singer in
the provinces. When she is la town, sometimes a few weeks
together, she lives with me. She is occasionally out late, as
she visits professional people, who meet late. Her employer
for the last two years is in attendance to speak to her cha-
-1 racter.

Mr. Jennings, the proprietor of an operatic troupe, said
he was in the habit of engaging Miss Wilson as one of his
operatic troupe for the provinces. He had done so for four
years. He had ascertained that Miss Wilson went on
Monday night to a music hall in Long-acre, and he had no
doubt that was the reason why she had not, when the case
was first before the court, stated where she had been, as he
told her once that if she sang there she might sing there
altogether, and probably she was afraid of offending him.
Mr. Arnold put several questions to the witness, in answer
to which he said Miss Wilson bore an excellent character.
Mrs. Sarah Macdonald, wife of Mr. Waa. Macdonald, of
the Scotch Stores, Long-acre, said—l have known Miss

Wilson for four years. I never heard anything derogatory
to her character. Cn the night of Easter Monday we had
a party at our house, and several processionals were present.
Miss Wilson was there all the evening, and left from half-
past 1 till 2.
Miss Julia Ballinger, a professional singer, said—l have
been in the habit of travelling with Miss Wilson for four
years with Mr. Jet.nings's company. I have during that
time lived with her, and never heard a word against her
character.

Mr. Arnold said the prisoner was charged with annoy-

ing gentlemen for the purpose of prostitution, and if the
statement of the constable was true, then the charge was
fully made out but it tne constable had not told the truth,
then it was not made out, and the constable was guilty of
wilful and corrupt perjury. In answer to the evidence of
the police, there was very strong evidence on the other side
as to the respectability of the young woman. Whtt had
great weight with him v'as, how the time was spent by her
on the night in question. He (Mr. Arnold) was aware that
a great many young women, ostensibly milliners or proces-
sionals, and persons of apparent respectability, eked out a
livipg by prostitution. The great difficulty he felt on both
occasions was no explanation being given as to how she
passed the night—but he was bound to say she had per-
, tectly satisfied him now. It would have been painful for
him (Mr. Arnold) to have convicted the young woman
after the protestations of respectability she had made, and
it was with great pain he said that the evidence of the con-
stable was utterly unworthy of belief. He believed the
young woman to be highly respectable. There was no
doubt the constable called her a prostitute, and that then
she resented it. He should take care the conduct of the
constable was represented to the Commissioners of Police,
and he trusted that he would not be allowed to remain many
hours longer in the force.
The young woman was discharged.
Some applause followed the magistrate's decision, but
was instantly checked.
THE CHARGE OF ABDUCTION.—Thomas Howard, the
keeper of a night refreshment-house in Haymarket, charged
with taking a girl, named Minnie Wilaon,from her parents,
she being under the age of 16, was again brought before
Mr. Arnold.
Mr. E. Dillon Lewis (in the office of Mr. Edward Lewis,
Great Marlborough-street) prosecuted, on behalf of the
Society for the Protection of Women and Children, and
on the prisoner being placed in the dock, said he had
good reason to believe that the girl Minnie Wilson had
been tampered with, as she was not in attendance. That
being the case, and as the evidence was not quite perfect,
he wished for another remand.
Sergeant Appleton, 26 C, said he had had charge of the
case, and he had reason to believe, indeed he was sure, the
girl had been tampered with. She had removed from the
place where she lodged, and £5O had been given to her
through an officer of the House of Detention.
Mr. Arnold—An officer of the House of Detention I
Mr. Lewis said he should be able to substantiate it.
Mr. Arnold—Sergeant, Do you know a waiter at the
Raglan Music Hall ?
Sergeant Appleton said he did not.
Mr. Arnold—l have received a letter, which I shall
hand to the solicitor for the prosecution, and from which it
appears the girl has been tampered with.
Sergeant Appleton said the girl's father would not come
forward without he was summoned.
Mr. Arnold—l shall remand the prisoner, but will take
two sureties in £lOO each.

[ADVERTISEILENTI—OOIIBUMptiOII, all nervous, bilious
liver, and stemach complaints, 1., every stage, are only ag-
gravate and accelerated by drugs of every description, but
perfecsly curable by Du Barry's health restoring Revalenta
Arabica Food, as proved by thousands of cases which Ilf
been considered hopeless. We quote a few. —Cure No. 62,914.
Miss Lange, 18 years of age, cured after the medical men had
abandoned all hope .4 of tier recovery from the last stage of
pulmonary consumption, with f • art al cough, expectoration,
exhaustion, spitting of blood, perspirations, hollow cheeks.-
emaciated to a skeleton. She is now, thank God, a perfectly
healthy, blooming, fleshy girl.—N. Lange, Commissaire df
Police. Cure, No. 48,270. Mr. James Roberts, of Wring ley
Surrey, of thirty years' diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver
derangement, and partial deafness.—Cure, No. 47,121. Miss
Elizabeth Jacobs, of extreme nervousness, indigestion,
gatherings, low spirits, and nervous fancies.—Cure, No.
54,816. ibe Rev. James T. Campbell, Fakenham, Norfolk,
of indigestion and torpidity of the liver, which had restate,
all medical reatment. In tins, tlb, 2s 9d; 2,13, tid ; 511.
its; 121 b, 225; 241 b, 405. Barry du Barry and C No. 77,
Regent-street, London ; also Fortnum and Mason; and all
grooere and cheznieta in every town of the United