The Sun.
London, England, 1849-08-15 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
HOME CIRCUIT.—Croydon, Aug. 14.
(Before Mr. Sergeant DowuNc.)
BROWNE V. BELLOW.

This was an. action to recover damages for a breach
of promise of marriage. The defendant did not appear,
but suffered judgment to go by default.
Mr. Pearson and Mr. Hannan were for the plaintiff.
The Learned COUNSEL on opening the case said,
that the plaintiff, Miss Martha Browne, was the daughter
of a respectable tradesman at Wandsworth, and the de-
fendant carried on business in the city of London, and,
as he was instructed, was a man of considerable property,
and also, he believed, filled the office of Common Coun-
cilman. The plaintiff was 25 years old, and the defend.
ant about 36, and a widower, with two children; and
the present action was brought to recover compensation
in damages from him for one of *the most grievous inju-
ries that could be inflicted upon a young woman. The
defendant had never ventured to cast the slightest sus-
picion upon the character of the young lady who was
now compelled to appear as plaintiff, and as he had suf.
fered judgment to go by default, all that the jury would
have to do was to say what damages she was entitled
to receive for the injury she had undoubtedly sustained.
The Learned Counsel then stated, that the wife of the
defendant having died about three years ago, he ap-
peared to beanxious to obtain another partner for his own
solace and to take care of his children, and in the spring
of last year, having been previeusly for some coniderablv
time upon intimate terms with the family of the plaintiff,
he made her an offer of marriage, and was received by
her triends as an accepted suitor, and a day was fixed for
the celebration of the ceremony of marriage. During this
period the defendant wrote several letters to the plain-
tiff, copies of which were read by the Learned Counsel.
(They were of a very commonplace description, but
clearly established the tact of the promise of marriage.)
At length, without any quarrel or cause being assigned,
the defendant appeared all at once to have relinqulshed
his intention of marrying the plaintiff, and announced
that determination to her in the following letter:-
4*November 23th, 1848.
"Dear Martha,—Whatever may be our future lot in
life, or whatever may be the change in our circumstances,
of this be assured, in me you will ever find a steadfast
friend, and one always ready to protect your interest. I
hope I shall not hurt your feelings by informing you
that I do not intend to pay my addresses to you any
longer. I hope, however, that this will not destroy our
friendship. Give my very kind love to your father and
mother.

" RICHARD DELLOW."
Mr. Pearson, in concluding, asked the jury, whether this
proceeding of the defendant was not must cruel? Ile
had succeeded in gaining the affections of the plaintiff,
and bad obtained her consent and that of her friends to
their union, and then, without assigning the slightest
reason for the proceeding, he had broken the solemn
promise he had made. He said it was unnecessary for
him to remark upon the pain and suffering which such
conduct had caused to the plaintiff, and w hen he had
proved the facts he would leave the case in the hands of
the jury, feeling assured that they would return a ver-
dict such as would satisfy the justice of the case.
Mr. J. Browne deposed that he carried on the busi-
ness of a basketmaker at Wandsworth, and the plaintiff
was his daughter. The defendant carried on the same
business on Garlick-hill, and be had known him for 20
years, and he constantly visited at his house. About
the month of September, 1848, the defendant asked his
permission to marry his daughter, and he gave his con-
sent, and the wedding-day was fixed for the first
Saturday in April of the present year.
Some evidence was then adduced to show that the
defendant was a man in good circumstances. The letters
were also put in, and this closed the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Sergeant Dowenic, addressing the jury, said,
that as the defendant had admitted the promise, and did
not appear to offer any explanation for his conduct, all
that they were called upon to do was to say by their
verdict what damages they considerd the plaintiff was
entitled to for the injury she had sustained. There ap-
peared to be no doubt that the defendant, after having
promised to marry the plaintiff, had, without any
pretence or cause, broken that promise, and by his last
letter he seemed inclined to substitute a sort of platonic
affection or friendship instead of the warmer and more
agreeable connexion which the plaintiff undoubtedly had
been led to anticipate. The jury, he said, would consider
all the circumstances of the case, and would give the
plaintiff such damages as they should consider she was
entitled to.
The jury, after a short consultation, returned a verdict
for the plaintiff—Damages 1201.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—Liverpool, Aug. 14.
NISI PRIUS COURT.— (13vfore Justice WIGHTNiN.)

BRIERLY V. BELFILLD.
In this case Mr. Cross appeared fur the plaintiff, and
Mr. Watson, Q.C., for the defendant.
The action was in debt for goods. supplied by the
plaintiff to the defendant's wife es necessaries, to which
the defendant pleaded never indebted.
The defendant, it appeared, was a farmer at Saddle-
worth, in Yorkshire, and was married to his present
wire about fifteen years ago. After living some time
together, during which defendant's wife bore him a child,
they separated and remained living a part for ten years,
till 1845, when his wife returned to him, and lived with
him about ten months, when they again separated, in
August, 1846, in cons, quence of a quarrel, vi Mob
ended in his wile packing up a bundle of clothes and
leaving the defendant's house. The defendant on that
occasion followed her in a very excited state, and struck
her, knocked her down; and kicked her. The defendant's
wife summoned _Mtn f.r this ruisault betore the Mayor of
Rochdale, by whom the defendant was bound over to
keep the peace towards her, and he then promised t,
behave better towards her in future. His wire, hoW-
ever, refused to return to him, aiid took a cottage
at Mayfield, near Rochdale, where she endeavoured to
obtain her livelihood by spinning. The plaintiff sup •
plied her with furniture to the value of about 71. to fur-
nish her cottage, and it was to recover this amount that
the present action was brought, on the ground that they
were necessaries supplied to her, as she could not live
with him by reason of his conduct to her.
For the defendant it was contended that he was not
liable for the debt, because although they had had a
quarrel, that had been settled, and he had not compelled
his wife to leave the house, nor treated her in such a
manner as to compel her to do so.
His LORDSHIP, in summing up, told the jury that if
they were of opinion that the violence which had been
used towards the defendant's wife was sufficient ground
for her leaving her husband, then that would be suffi-
cient to pledge his credit with the world for necessaries
supplied to her, and the plaintiff would be entitled to
recover his debt. But if they should be of opinion her
leaving her husband was more from caprice and temper
than from fear of his violence, then she bad no right to
leave his roof, and his credit would not be pledged to
supply her with necessaries.
The jury found a verdict for the defendant.
CROWN COURT—(Before Mr. Justice .PATTESON).
• Denis Malow, aged 29, was indicted for stabbing John
Peace with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm.
Mr. Sowler appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. At-
kinson for the defence._ _

It appeared that both the prosecutor and the prisoner
caseupled a respectable station in life, the prosecutor car-
rying on business as a coal agent at Bolton, and the
prisoner being a surveyor at Farnworter, in this county.
On the 15th of June last, the prosecutor and the prisoner
were drinking together at Bolton, at the Shakspere
public-house, and began there tossing for money, which
ended in the prosecutor winning a shilling, upon which
the prisoner proposed to toss " double or quits." This
the prosecutor refused to do, and left the house; the
prisoner followed him asking him if " he wanted his
shilling." The prosecutor said, he had won it honourably,
and the prisoner replied, " I'll give it thee." The priso-
ner then pulled a knife out of his waistcoat pocket, with
which he attempted to strike the prosecutor in the face.
The prosecutor, however, warded off the blow, but in
doing so the blade of the knife entered his wrist. The
prisoner then stabbed him three or four times in the
abdomen, and the prosecutor having at length knocked
the prisoner down and called for assistance, the kuite
was taken from the prisoner, and he was given into cus-
tody. The wounds inflicted bled profusely, but were not
dangerous.
Mr. ATKINSON having addressed the jury for the
prisoner,
His LORDSHIP summed up, and
The jury lound the prisoner Guilty.
Sentence was deferred.

POLICE IN TELL IGENCE.
MAR YLEBONE.

William Jones Campbell, a well-dressed man, was
brought before Mr. Broughton, the sitting magistrate,
on a charge of robbery; and it will be seen, from what
transpired in the course of the inquiry, that there is a
probability that more cases than the present one will be
brought against him.
It appeared that on the 9th ult. the prisoner, who
represented himself to be a, gentleman of independent
property, entered upon the occupancy of spent-bents at
the house of Mr, Harris, 12, Union-place, New-road,
and had with him his wife, mother, and child. On Sun-
day, the 30th ult., Mrs. Harris and her family went to
church, and on their return it was ascertained that three
sovereigns had been abstracted from a desk. The pri-
soner, who was admitted as a lodger without inquiries
had beingiPreviously made with regard to the reference he
g•Ten, absconded one day from the dwelling ; and
his wife, mother, and child also took the opportunity of
quitting.
No notice whatever of their intention to du so
having been given,.it was naturally enough imagined
that the three sovereigns were stolen by the prisoner,
who was ultimately taken into custody by a constable of
other 1
t[e D division of police.
Tee prisoner, on being asked what he had to say,
asserted his innocence ; but es it was stated that there
was good reason to believe that he had " victimized'
good
to some extent, he was re-
manded for a week.
Charles Whitby Parker, a hanger-on at county and
other courts, and who passes himself off as a memLer of
the legal
lently profession, was charged with having fraudu-
lently sums of money from Mr. Crothers,
Carlisle-street, Portman-market, under pretence of set-
tlinr an action at the suit of a Mr. Joseph.
Mr. Beard, from the office of Mr. Buchanan, solicitor,
Basinghall-street, attended for the prosecution, and the
witnesses, whom he examined at some_ length, fully
proved the case.
The prisoner was committed for trial.
WESTMINSTER.
Stephen Gibbons, a labouring man, and Ann, his wife,
a desperately violent woman, were charged with the
following unprovoked and murderdus assault upon Mary
Ann Callaghan, who, owing to the serious nature of her
injuries, was unable to attend before the magistrate. -
Upon the accused being placed in the dock, Mr. BRO •
DER'? recognized the male prisoner, who wore a linen
bandage round his head, as a man who had applied to
him on the previous day, while in a state of drunken-
ness, for a warrant against some person, which, Of course,
under the cirelyugaegegi, wail thou reflood.
.. .4