The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-24 00:00:00

FOWLER V. BAYLEY.

_
This was a special jury case. The plaintiff Har- '
riet Sparks Fowler sued the defendant, Vere Temple
Bayley, for a breach of his promise to marry her.
The aefendant pleaded, first, that he did not make
the promise as alleged, and, secondly, that the
plaintiff was an immoral person.
Mr. Pearce and Mr. Martin were counsel for the
plaintiff; and Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Honey-
man were for the defendant.
Mr. Pearce, in opening the case, said that the
plaintiff was a young woman living with her parents
at Colchester, and the defendant was captain in the
54th Regiment, and the parties became acquainted
while he was stationed at the camp at Colchester.
The first acquaintance took place two or three
years ago, and the plaintiff and the defendant used
to meet at the house of a person named Wendon,
who kept a tobacconist's shop at Colchester, and he
believed that on more than one occasion the defen-
dant expressed his intention to marry the plaintiff,
and while the defendant was at Aldershot and other
places with his regiment he wrote a great many
letters to the plaintiff, some of which he should
have to read, and the jury would judge from the
contents of these letters whether there could be
any reasonable doubt that the parties were upon
terms of the greatest intimacy and affection, and
such as would warrant the plaintiff in believing
that the defendant intended to make her his wife.
He should also have to lay before them another do-
cument of a very singular character, and which
appeared to have been drawn up and signed by the
defendant, and which, he submitted, would clearly
show what his intentions were with regard to the
plaintiff. It was dated the 3d of February, 1861,
and was in the following terms :
,4 I, Vere Temple Bayley, lieutenant in her Majesty's
54th Regiment, do declare that I consider Miss Harriet
Fowler, of Colchester, as my wife."
The learned counsel then stated that it appeared
that in the beginning of the present year the de-
fendant had married a lady who, he believed, was
possessed of considerable property, and it was there-
fore impossible for him to fulfil his engagement
with the plaintiff; and, under these circumstances,
it was for the jury to say what amount of damages
she was entitled to receive at the hands of the de-
fendant.
Jane Wendon deposed that her husband was
groom to an officer at the camp at Colchester, and
in 1861 she kept a tobacconist's shop in that town.
She knew the plaintiff and the defendant, and they
used to come to her shop almost every day during
the year 1861. (The witness was then shown the
document that had been read by the learned coun-
sel, and she stated it was in the handwriting of the
defendant.) The plaintiff was a dressmaker. The
defendant used to say a great many things to her.
(A laugh.) He once said to he': in witness's pre-
sence that if he took any other lady to the altar but
her he hoped he should be struck dead. (A laugh.)
He observed that he would never have any other
woman, and he threatened to destroy himself upon
one occasion when the plaintiff talked of leaving
him.

Cross-examined—Witness et present kept a straw
bonnet shop. Nothing was done at her former
place of business except selling tobacco. (A laugh.)
The defendant and the plaintiff used to be in the
front shop together, but there was a screen in the
shop and they went behind it, so that nobody could
see them. (A laugh.) Witness was always present,
and she was sure that nothing improper took place
between them.
Mr. Hawkins, to the witness—You do not mean
to say that you were all three behind the screen to-
gether. (A laugh.)
Witness—Oh, no, I was in the shop, attending
to my business, but I could hear all that took place.
Cross-examination continued—They used to make
love before me, and did not mind my being there.
(A laugh.) No one else used to come to my shop
to make love, and I do not remember• any other lady
or gentleman going beyond the screen. (A laugh.)
Mr. Hawkins—Did you ever hear of people in
Colchester going courting in a tobacconist's shop
before ? (Laughter.)
Witness—Well, I have heard of such things being
done. (Renewed laughter.) She added that the de-
fendant was quite a young man, but she did not
know that he was not more than one or two and
twenty, and she should think from his appearance
he was about 30.
Mr. Pearce then put in a number of letters that
had been written by the defendant to the plaintiff.
He addressed her as " My dearest Harry," and sub-
scribed himself sometimes " Vere,' and at others
"her boy." In one of these letters defendant said—
" I wish to put the case clearly before you, that you may
judge for yourself. I have done all I can to show you how
much I love you, and if you desert me my life will be a
blank. You will always find a friend in me, and I will
fulfil all the promises I have made,—Yours, till death,
" VERE."

In another he said-
-46 You alone can save me from destruction. I have been
all day at the Cups, and have done nothing but drink.
What I want of you is to make me give up drinking, and
I could do it for your sake. (A laugh.) I have got up from
my bed to write this. (Renewed laughter.) Come what
may, I will never desert you."
In another letter the defendant stated that he had
been at a ball, and he felt the effects at five o'clock
the following morning. He also said that he was
going out to dine at Thompson's, whom she knew
as the man with the glass in his eye and red mous-
taches. (Laughter.)
In one of the other letters that was read the de-
fendant concluded by stating that the tea-kettle
was boiling over, and he had just taken up the
kettle-holder to remove it from the fire. (Laughter.)
There were a number of other letters of a similar
character, and when they had been read the case
for the plaintiff was closed.
Mr. Hawkins then addressed the jury for the de-
fendant, and he contended that, in the first place,
there was not the slightest evidence upon which
they would be justified in forming the conclusion
that the defendant had ever promised to marry the
plaintiff. He said that he could not deny that the
defendant had written a number of very silly, rub-
bishing letters to the plaintiff; but they only, as it
appeared to him, tended to show the character of
the intimacy that existed between them, and that
they negatived the supposition that the defendant
entertained any idea of marriage. He then, stated