The Sun.
London, England, 1847-09-09 00:00:00

4r3Aittit) bittoti

SHERIFFS' COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BURCHELL)

A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR.-COOPER V. SAFFREY.-
BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.
This was an inquiry to assess damages for a breach
of promise of marriage. The defendant had, in the
first instance, pleaded that he was not guilty of the
breach, but having withdrawn his plea, the present
inquiry was required. The damages were laid at
5001.

Mr. CROUCH stated the case for the plaintiff, who
is a young widow, only 26 years of age, and had
held an engagement in a china warehouse at Bath.
Defendant is an overseer at Mr. Brettel's, prin
ter, in Rupert-street, Soho. It appeared that the
plaintiff had come up to London, on a visit to her
sister, whose husband was also in Mr. Brettel's em-
ployment, and there an acquaintance commenced be-
tween them, and a correspondence was kept up for
nearly twelve months. The letters throughout,
with the exception of the last, were full of tender and
affectionate expressions, and their marriage was
spoken of by him as definitely arranged, and he ulti-
mately wrote requesting her at once to give notice
to quit the service she was in, and to come up to
London. This was on the Ist of April, 1846; but
after she had made her preparations, he first exhibited
a coolness by writing to say he could not meet
her at the station. She arrived in London, and
went to her sister's house, but defendant refused to
meet her there, and ultimately wrote a letter, in
which he broke off the connexion, and said that he
did not love her so as to justify his entering into a
matrimonial alliance with her. The defendant had

not, in the slightest degree, insinuated anything
against the virtue or character of the plaintiff, and
the only supposition which could be come to was that
he had formed an attachment to another female. He
(the Learned Counsel) considered it a most aggra-
vated case in humble life, and such as would entitle
her to ample damages for the injury done to her feel-
ings, and for the loss of a situation in which she
might have still remained comfortable.

Evidence was adduced, and some letters put in,
which left the promise beyond question ; and it was
shown that she had resigned a situation of 401. a year,
which would have been increased.

Mr. Turner, the plaintiff's brother-in-law, clerk
to Mr. Brettel, proved that he had urged defendant
not to enter into any correspondence without fully
considering the matter and consulting his friends, but
defendant went down to Bath and kept up the corre-
spondence till April in this year. Defendant is about
forty years of age.
Mr. Hick, of Bath, proved that plaintiff left his
service to be married to defendant.

Mr. BALLANTINE, for the defendant, endeavoured to
elicit that defendant was ugly, deformed, and sickly ;
but the witness would not agree that such was the
case. Defendant was an intelligent and agreeable
young man. It was admitted defendant had written
the plaintiff's name in a Bible and Prayer-book
" Saffery."
Mr. BALLANTINE addressed the jury for the de-
fendant, and after most distinctly repudiating any
intention to impute any impropriety of conduct on
the part of the plaintiff, but attributed the refusal to
the purest motives, from a consciousness that a mar-
riage would only bring sorrow and misery, as, in
addition to the natural deformity of the defendant, he
was suffering under a bad cough, and was also lame;
and his father considered that it would have been
nothing short of insanity to marry under such cir-
cumstances. The Learned Counsel could not con-
sider the
.plaintiff's feelings could have been much
wounded if she had fallen in love in a few days.
That defendant had unfairly, improperly, and rashly
entered into an engagement, there could be no doubt,
but he had no ulterior object than an honourable one,
and that, from the circumstances stated, he had with-
drawn himself, without casting the least blame upon
the plaintiff, but having privately and publicly taken
the whole upon himself.
The UNDER- SIIERIFF summed up, and
The jury, after a short consultation, gave a verdict
for 501.
Mr. Green, of Walbrook, was solicitor for the
plaintiff.