The Sun.
London, England, 1849-04-21 00:00:00

AUSTRIA.

The letters from the seat of war in Hungary, which
appear in the Vienna papers of the 15th, are such as
to induce us to believe that the victory of Waitzen
was even more complete than it has been represented,
and that the Imperial army before Comorn is threat-
athegeied, railroadtat liisne to leadingsay on from
threat-
ened with destruction. The Ban of Croatia, whose
pphoessitti o nt
o Albert of l
atendon cz
left bank of the Danube, is now most suddenly
found to be on the right bank of that river. Nor is
it probable that he would have quitted his former
was
position and crossed the river, unless compelled
by a defeat. The Hungarian Generals Vetter and
Dembinski following in the wake of Baron Jella-
chich's corps, have likewise crossed the Danube, and
occupied Weissenburg ; in other words, the Hun-
garians had turned either wing of the Austrian army
by a flank march, and Buda-Perth, which a few days
ago formed the centre operations of either army,
is now in the rear of the scene of war and of the
Magyar forces. The Imperial army besieging
Cemthnouedmtesboau,
vrenwoe Comore,
arsaernoddbl
thi
ogiwhicheeha besides
oppose
ittos
se ntdh et Commander,
has
to
General
Ge
approach
e been r
aeGle
General
taekhbla
eel
rvegno,ei
ghbeyo
Hunga-
rians from Waitzen to Gran, is now exposed to a
threefold attack from the north, the south, and from
the garrison of the fortress itself. The country sur-
rounding Comorn is all but in the hands of the Mag-
yars, and Comorn is but 20 leagues distant from
Vienna.

LAW IN TEL LIGEN CE.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, April 20.
;Before Mr. Justice PATTESON and Mr. Justice ERLE

DOE DEM. STEVENS v. STEVENS.
This was an action of ejectment brought by Nicholas
Stevens against his brother, John Stevens, to recover
possession of certain premises alleged to have been left
by the will of Nicholas Stevens (the father, a horse
dealer at Bodmin, who died at the age of seventy-
six), to the advantage of Nicholas, one of his
younger sons. John, the elder son, the heir-at-
law, had taken possession of the property in
question, The will was dated the 18th Sept., 1848.
On that day John, the elder son, was at Redruth, where
he was in partnership with his brother Joseph, as a
horse-dealer. William was also absent at Barnstaple.
Nicholas, in favour of whom the will was made, was at
home with the father; Jane, one of his daughters, living
with them. Mrs. Geek another daughter, a widow,
lived at Bodmin, at some little distance.from her father's
residence. Old Stevens was taken ill some time before
the 18th of September, and got gradually much
worse. A letter was then written by Nicholas
to William on the 15th or 16th of September,
informing him that their father was ill, and ask-
ing him to come home immediately and see about
different things. It contained this passage: "I think he
cannot continue loag. We want to try and get him to
have a doctor, and see about a w ill, or we shalt all be
done. Do not say anything about his being ill to any
bldy, or we shall have a house full. We will send to
Redruth when they (John and Joseph) are gone." The
letter was to be sent when they were gone to Barn-
staple fair. Old Mr. Stevens had a great objec-
tion to a doctor, and always said that brandy
swuarsgeonthoef bßodmin,mweadaiacitne b
last,
senutt
forl.
who,
r Ward, a
inhis affi-
davit, after describing the symptoms of Mr. Stevens,
stated that. at the time of the execution of his will it was
highly improbable that he was in a fit state of mind to
make one. The verdict was found for the defendant.

Mr. CHOWDER now moved for a rule to show cause
why the verdict for the defendant should not be set aside
rind a new trial had—first, on the ground of misdirection
on the part of the Learned Judge, Mr. Justice Williams,
before whom it was tried; secondly, on the ground of the
reception of improper evidtrnpe; and thirdly, that the
verdict given was contrary to.evidence.
The Court took time to consider the application.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, April 19.
WILDS V. HARRIS.

This was an action to recover compensation in
damages for a breach of promise of marriage, under
the following circumstances.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins and Mr. Needham were for
the plaintiff; Mr. Huddlestone conducted the defence.
The Learned SERGEANT, in stating the plaintiff's
case, said that his ,client was a widow, residing in
Birmingham, where she carried on the business of
gimblet- maker, which had been previously carried on
by her late husband. The defendant was a contrac-
tor under the Telegraphic Railway Company, earning
a salary of 3001. a year. In the year 1847 he came
to Birmingham for the purpose of erecting the tele-
graph for the London and North-western Railway,
and took lodgings in the house of the plailitiff. Al-
most immediately he began to pay her marked atten-
tion, representing himself as the employe of Govern-
.' ment with an income of 3001. a year. He after a few
toe days declared himself her lover, and proposed
marriage. Plaintiff accepted him, and he not only
- made the promise to marry, but actually gave orders
abouti the
sr to
8 tour. He further said that as he would be settled in
te wedding
be
bridesmaid,dresses,
her s and planned the wedding
ta,44 Birmingham, he would take a house for her in Ashley-
! grove or Vauxhall. All of a sudden he pretended he
73
534 received a message from Somerset-house, and would
be obliged to go to London, but would return within
iai
' a fortnight; that time had long elapsed, though plain-
7s. tiff wrote defendant several letters reminding him of
.'d his promise, but never could obtain a reply ; at last an
44 inquiry was set on foot, when it was ascertained that
he was a married man with a wife and four children.
1 The Learned Counsel appealed to the jury, whether
i the plaintiff was not entitled to heavy damages. The
defendant not only palmed himself on her as a single
man, but what was worse, unhappily, insinuated him•
self into her embraces, and the fruit of such inter-
course was an illegitimate child. He was sure under
those circumstances his unfortunate client would
obtain justice at their hands.
Miss Jane Steer stated that she was the sister of
the plaintiff, who is a gitnblet maker, in Birmingham.
o ge in her
sister's '
In January, 1848, the defendant came to l
sister's house, who is a widow, about 28 years of age.
Heard defendant propose marriage to her sister, and
told witness she should be bridesmaid, and spoke of
the wedding dresses she should wear. He repre -
sented himself as employed by Government to lay
down rails for the public safety. He stated that for
the wedding trip he would take her to London, but
as he was to be stationed in Birmingham he would
take a house there. Tie lodged in her sister's house
from the 4th of January to the Ist of February.
Cross-examined—N hen he made the promise it
was on a Sunday evening, they were drinking gin
and water. Cannot remember the colour of the pro-
posed wedding dress for her as bridesmaid. There
are two apprentices in the house, one twenty two
1 years of age, the other a mere boy. Her sister was
confined of a child in the September after the defendant
„,,'' left.
90

Re-examined—Her sister had previously two chil-
dren by her husband.
Mr. Thomas Evans, clerk in the telegraph office,
proved that the defendant was employed as a con-
tractor. Previously to the present year his profits
were about 3001. a year, but this year they would
not be more than 1001. or 150/. lie believed him to
be a married man with four children.
Mr. HUDDLESTONE addressed the Jury for the de-
fendant, and said that his client was represented to be
a large contractor for the Telegraphic Railway. lie
was no more than a common carpenter, and the ques-
tion was, whether any promie was made, was there
any proof the recently born child was the defendant's.
Could she not have summoned him before a magis-
trate, and produced his conviction before them in evi-
dence to establish the fact, but his unfortunate client
had got into the widow's clutches. The Learned
Gentleman concluded by calling on the jury to give
the smallest possible damages.
His LORDSHIP told the jury that he thought the
promise was proved, and the question for them was
damages, which he thought should be moderate.
The jury having retired for half an hour, found a
verdict for the plaintiff, damages 10/.

THE DANISII BLOCKADE.--The following arrivals
in the river have been officially reported at the Custom-
house as having taken place on Wednesday last:—The
ship Malcolm Brown, of London, has arrived at Graves-
end, with her outward cargo on board, having been
cleared on the sth inst. for Hamburgh, but prevented
entering the Elbe by the Danish blockading squadron;
the vessel Argo, of Shields, arrived at Stonestairs, with
her outward cargo on board, having been cleared on the
5.11 inst. for Hamburgh, and prevented entering the
Elbe by the Danish blockading squadron; and the vessel
Concordia, of Waterford, has arrived at Deptford, with
her outward cargo on board, having been cleared for
Bremer-haven, and prevented from entering, the port
Wing ins state of blook§de.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 20.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid certain returns
on the table relating to the assessment of poor-rate iu
Ireland.

SMOKE BILL.

Lord REDESnALE introduced the Prevention of
Smoke Bill, which was read a first time.

PETITIONS.

Lord COLCHESTER presented a petition from the
landowners of Sussex, complaining of agricultural
distress.

The Earl of ROSSE presented several petitions from
various unions in Ireland against the rate in aid.
CONVERSION OF ESTATES BILL.

The LORD CHANCELLOR gave notice that on
Thursday he should wove the second reading of the
Conversion into Renewable Leaseholds of Copyhold
Estates Bill.

CASE OF MESSRS. CHADWICK AND NI ARRIN ER.

Lord BEAUMONT presented petitions from Messrs.
Chadwick and Marriner, apologizing for their contempt,
and praying that their Lordships would be pleased to
order their release from custody. The Noble Lord moved
that these petitions should be taken into consideration,
and would leave it to the Noble Lcrd on the Woolsack
to state when they ought to be taken into consideration.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought that they could
not be taken into consideration before Monday.
Lord BEAUMONT gave notice that oa Monday n xt
he would move that these petitions be taken into the
consideration of the House.
Their Lord hips then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 20.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four
o'clock.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented several petitions from
different parts, praying that no new licences might be
granted to beer-houses.
UNIVERSAL RAILWAY CASUALTY COMPEN•

SATION COMPANY BILL.
The third reading of this Bill was postponed till
Monday.
Colonel REID presented a petition from Windsor
against the alteration of the Law of Marriage Bill.
Colonel MUIR presented several petitions from Glas-
gow and other parts of Scotland, against the runnirg of
trains on Sundays on railways. Also petitions against
the Marriage Bill and the Lunatic Asylums Bill.
• Mr. ALCOCK presented petitions from Surrey
against any alteration in the law of marriage.
Mr. HEY WORTH presented petitions from Derby
and other places against granting any further licences
to beer-houses.
Mr. FERGUS presented several petitions from dif-
ferent parts of Scotland in favour of the Clergy Relief
Bill, against the Marriage Registration Bill, and against
the Lunatic Asylums Bill.
Sir D. DUNDAS presented petitions from Suther-
landshire against the running of passenger trains on
Sundays.
Mr. TURNER presented a petition from Coventry
against the Public Roads Bill.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY presented a petition from
Bridgenorth against any alteration in the law of marriage.
Mr. PLUMPTRE presented a petition from Rams-
gate against any alteration in the navigation-laws.
Captain BATESON presented petitions from London-
derry against the Rate in Aid Bill.
Mr. BANKES presented petitions from Dorsetshire
praying for the repeal of the malt and hop duties.
Captain PEC H ELL presented a petition from Brighton
in favour of the Clergy Relief Bill and the release of

the Rev. Mr. Shore.
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON presented petitions from
Westminster, and other places, praying for the extension
of the elective franchise.
Mr. J. S. WORTLEY presented a petition from St.
Mary-le-Strand, and also several other petitions, in favour
of the Marriage Bill.
Mr. H. A. HERBERT presented a petition from the
grand jury of the county of Kerry, praying for an amend-
ment of the poor-law, and another, praying for an
alteration of the Irish grand-jury laws.
Mr. M. GIBSON presented a petition from Manches-
ter, complaining of the state of the- relations between
this country and Brazils, in reference to the suppres-
sion of the slave trade.
SCOTCH LUNATIC ASYLUMS.

In reply to Mr. MACKENZIE,
The LORD ADVOCATE said he had no objection

to lay on the table of the House the information which
he had received relative to the lunatic asylums in Scot-
land, and that he would not move the second reading
of the Lunitic Asylums (Scotland) Bill until the 30th
of April.