The Sun.
London, England, 1864-08-22 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—LEEDS, August 20.
(Before Mr. Justice Blacklurn.)
LISTER V. WRAY.-A. LADY CHARGED WITH BREACH 01

PROMISE.
In this case plaintiff, a waste dealer in Leeds, claimed
£l,OOO damages from Mrs. Patienco Wray, who has already
been thrice married, and who' is possessed of p. jointure of
£7OO per year. The action attracted considerable interest,
in consequence of the singularity of the case, and the ad-
vanced age cf the parties. The court was a scene of
merriment during the whole course of the hearing. _

Mr. Digby Seymourr, Q.C., and Mr. Middleton were
for the plaintiff ; and Mr. Maule and Mr. V. Blackburn
represented the defendant (who occupied a seat in the
gallery.)

Mr. Seymour, in opening the cause, stated that the pre-
liminaries with respect to the marriage had been so far
arranged that the wedding breakfast was ordered, and the
Rev. Mr. Hudswell was the gentleman selected to perform
the ceremony. On the day before that arranged for the
ceremony, a message came from the lady that she had
changed her mind. Plaintiff had a carpet bag at the
house of the defendant at the time, containing his wed-
ding suit, and when he went to accompany her, as be
thought to the altar, the door was slamed in his face, There
was no material disparity in point of years between the Pa"
ties. Plaintiff lost a wife, and a benefit and a solace which
he sought in his declining years, and he had also lost the
advantage of her handsome income of £6OO or £7OO per
year. This was certainly a case in which the lady bad
promised to marry and had not fulfiled that contract, Lou
the question must therefore go to the jury as to tho amount
of damages.

William West, tailor and draper, of Leeds—l was
stay-
ing at Craigland's Hotel, Ilkley, in September, 1863.
defendant was staying at Ilkley, and occasionally I saW
plaintiff coming to the place. I have seen them together as
if
they were on terms of intimacy. They appeared to spiel
each other's company. Had never seen any act of fami-
liarity between them. The defendant (Mrs. Wray) i 5 a
very fresh looking lady for her years.
Cross-examined by Mr Maule—ls not Mrs Wray about
75 ?
Witness—lt is hard to judge a lady's age. (Laughter.)
Were you staying at Ilkley at the same hotel ?-1 scsg"
Did you happen to be present in the garden when the plain.
tiff's wig was blown into a cherry tree ? (Laughter:l--
I was.
Did you not make a remark that it would scare the crows ?
—I did not.
Were you of opinion that they were about the same age ?
—I should think the gentleman was the junior.
Mr Sedgwick, clerk in the Superintendent Registrar 'S
Office, East-parade, Leeds, stated that in February the
plaintiff and defendant came into the office together. The/
seemed very happy. Mr Lister asked for a notice of licencede,
and the lady waited until it was filled up. Wit"ss rok g
plaintiff's name, and his residence, and whom he was gf
rp], ft
he
to marry ? The answer was "Patience Wray,'i"
two guineas was paid by the plaintiff. The age g.v— b" o
be
lady was 69, and the "youthful bridegroom" stated thyat
was 58 years of age. The lady looked fresh and sprightly
for her years.
The Rev. Mr Hudswell said he had received a note t°
state that he was to be prepared to marry the plaintiff an
defendant on the 15th February. On that morning' 11°W
ever, he received another note to the effect that the defendant
had been taken ill during the night, and that the wedding
would have to be postponed for a few days. The marriage
had not since been performed by him (witness).
Re-examined by Seymour—l understand plaintiff gaye
up business just before the time fixed for the marriage. i•
do not know that the lady provided the money for passing
the plaintiff through the Bankruptcy Court. Did not think
that there was any great disparity in the ages of the parties
concerned.

Harriet. Barker (who was for some time servant to Mrs
Wray) stated that she had seen plaintiff and defendant to-
gether on several occasions. Witness heard from defendant
last February that she would not marry Mr Lister, and that
she did not intend to marry again. A carpet-bag contain-
ing plaintiff's clothes was handed to him, and he was told
to go, inasmuch as the defendant would not marry him.
Cross-examined by Mr Maule—You say that Mrs Wray,
before she went, said she would not marry Mr Lister ?
Yes, she did.

The Judge—The promise of marriage is proved, and both
of you gentlemen can address the jury, if you like, on the
point of damages.

Mr Seymour— I hope they will not insult him. (Laughter.)
The Judge—l hope they will. (Increased merriment.)
The question was then left to the jury, who speedily
decided in favour of the plaintiff. Damages one farthing.