The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-29 00:00:00

BREACHES OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.

BROOK V. CARTER (AT YORK).—Mr. Bliss, in
stating the case, said the plaintiff, Betsy Brook,
was the daughter of the late Mr. John Brook, who
was a woollen manufacturer and a person of consi-
derable property at Upperthong, near Holmfirth.
He had a family of five sons and four daughters, all
of whom were respectably married, except the plain-
tiff. The defendant, Ralph Carter, resides in the
same place, and for many years lived with his
mother, who was a woman of considerable property.
He was himself a woollen manufacturer, and his
family and that of the plaintiff, living near each
other, were well acquainted. The defendant and
the plaintiff grew up as friends together from child-
hood; as children they were playmates, and, as the
jury could well understand, when the plaintiff
arrived at the age of about eighteen their attach-
ment ripened into strong affection, and the defendant
cantinued to court her for years. The learned
counsel said he wished he had not to add—and this
was one a the causes, no doubt, of the reluctance
with which the plaintiff had resorted to this means
of redress—thal, when about thirty years of age,
the defendant so far overpowered and took advan-
tage of her affection that she became by him the
mother of a child. The child was acknowledged
by the defendant, and was treated kindly by him and
also by the members of his family. The infant died
when it was nineteen months old, and the defen-
dant and other members of the family attended
the funeral. The plaintiff's father was very angry
at the birth of the child, and the defendant not being .
received in the house as he had previously been, dis-
continued his visits, but subsequently continued to
meet the plaintiff at the houses of her sister and
sister-in-law. This continued for a great number
of years, and, with the single exception that had
been mentioned, their intercourse was characterised
with propriety and purity. Matters went on in this
manner for some time, and many years ago the
plaintiffs mother died, and, her sisters being mar-
ried, she was left to keep house for her father. She
always expected that the defendant would fulfil his
promise, and at this time an engagement was made
between them that they should be married upon her
father's death. This occurred in 1857, but shortly
before his death he met with some pecuniary mis-
fortunes. After her father's death, when the de-
fendant knew he would be called on to fulfil his
promise, he forebore to go to the house, and after
hoping and waiting day after day, month after
month, and year by year, at last, when the plaintiff's
patience was exhausted, and love almost desperate,
the defendant was called upon by a professional man
to fulfil his premise, and he refused. Some cor-
respondence took place, and the defendant denied
that he had made any promise, and he now pleaded
this as his defence ; and contended further that if a
promise was made it was abandoned by both parties,
and that the defendant had been absolved, exoner-
ated and discharged from his promise by the plain-
tiff. It was true (the learned counsel said) that both
these parties were advanced in life, the defendant
being about 63 years of age and the plaintiff about
61. (Laughter.) The jury returned a verdict for
the plaintiff. Damages £5OO. On the application
of the defendant's counsel the judge consented to
stay execution, as it was thought the damages were
excessive.

BILLS V. NELSON (NOTTINGHAM).—The plaintiff
is the daughter of a farmer in respectable circum-
stances, residing at Bawtry, North Notts, and the
defendant, a surgeon practising in the same town,
and a widower of 40 years of age. The plaintiff,
who is a young woman of very attractive appear-
ance, engaged herself last year as housekeeper to
the defendant. According to the defendant him-
self the case was one of love at first sight. After
keeping the defendant's house till the close of the
year, the plaintiff had a child by the defendant,
who, as was alleged, promised to marry the young
lady before and after the event occurred. He did
not do so, and now denied that any promise was
ever made. The child was not affiliated in conse-
quence of the defendant's promise of marriage. The
jury found for the plaintiff, damages £l5O.

COUN2ItY MAR.EI 1 AS.

..,- - v.

COLCHESTER-JULY 26.

--
To-day there was a small supply of wheat at market,
and there was a very limited business doing, with little
change in the prices of last week. A sample or two of new
white and hog peas were sold.

Wheat, white. s6s 62s Beans,Mazagan..3sB 38s
red 54s 60s middle & small.3Bs 42s
Barley —s —s Peas, white 38s 42s
Oats —s gray 38s 42s