The Sun.
London, England, 1841-12-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON; THURSDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1841.

how could he resist these combined attacks ? written after that transaction, after taunting him with his
He now came to a part of the case which he could not many breeches—(A loud laugh)—the Learned Counsel
approach without feelings of regret, and he must add of supposed she meant breaches of promise—she said that
1
deep disgust. Mr. Rosser was the father of six children, she 'could not think of accepting the amount she would
two of them unmarried daughters, residing with him, have done before the purchase of the license ; , that no
and such a step must have been peculiarly unpalatable moiety less than an income of 1001. or 1201 a-year for
and unpleasant to their feelings. His Learned Friend life would induce ber to refrain from proceeding
had suggested that the fair comparison would have been against him; and in another, in reply to an offer on his
to put the case as having occurred to one of part of 601. a-year, she says, "As you are so far com-
their own daughters, but he trusted that such an event mitted, it remains for yourself to make me amore worthy
could not possibly occur out of the Darbon family, and offer." And this was the young lady who was worn to
that no respectable female would endeavour to form a a skeleton by her unrequited love for this old man.
clandestine connection with an old man against the Now, with regard to the evidence to prove this state of
wishes of her family. They had seen that when 'the agonised feelings, with the ' exception of the mother,
daughters were absent they came to see him clandcs- wleisd,'evidence could not be much relied on, the only
tinely.and by stealth ; and that it was stipulated the witnesses called were the milliner in Regent-street
marriage should not take place till .Mr. and Mrs. Allen who 'bad tried a bonnet on for the young lady,
were out of the way. He would show, further, that the when, in company with Mr. Rosser, and to whose shop
plaintiff had endeavoured to undermine the affections of the young lady again went a few days ago, accompanied
the father for his children, and if he proved that he by her attorney and Mrs. Bennett, who had seen her
would ask them, whether that would not satisfy them once three years ago, and again a few weeks since,
that the only object of the plaintiff was a mercenary one? It was evident Miss Darbon was an accomplished actress,
On the 2d of January, 1840, she wrote, expressing a wish and she had got up a face of agony for the occa-
to see him again, and that he had explained to his sion. Her real character could be better judged of
daughter that her visit was on family business. On 14th from her letters. He was thankful to his friend
March she said she would never release him, and that he for having put in Mr. Rosser's letters, written since the
seemed to prefer his obdurate daughters to her, and to action, because they showed what must be the state of
marry her in privacy if he chose to do. On mind of that unfortunate old gentleman. He could not
25th April, they had some of the articles he purchased justify these letters, but he would read them one letter
referred to. She said she would come to town again if written by Miss Darbon after she had dropped
he wished it ; she wanted very few under robings, and the mask, which he thought was some sort of
asked him if he preferred the blue chequered silk; telling excuse for one of the letters which Mr. Ros-
him to send to the Bolt-in-Tun to avoid suspicion. ser had written. That letter was dated June 9, 1841.
Mrs. Darbon had yesterday denied that there There was then a letter of the 9th of January, 1841,
were any nightcaps sent, but on 29th April she commencing " Mr. Rosser—Dear Sir." In this letter
wrote to say she had sent the patterns to him. Think of the plaintiff spoke of Mr. Rosser's aggravated and
a gentleman of eighty-two having patterns of ladies' dastardly conduct;" of his "prevarications and jealousies
dresses sent to him! One was a pattern of body of dress without grounds." " Your very abominable and utterly
and the other of slips, leaving the matter altogether to groundless charges," she continued, " drove me to dis-
his good taste—she thought three petticoats enough. traction, .and I. feel towards you a total disgust.
the night gowns for summer wear, and three night- Nothing can exceed your very horrid treachery.
caps—(Roars of laughter)—and not too much over the You have all your life been plotting against me all
face.—(Renewed laughter.) Then there was the number through the piece." " She could meet him," she said,
of fingers' length of the dresses and slips, and night "on all the charges ; she did not fear any of his false-
gowns, one yard and a half long.—(Bursts of laughter.) hoods, and she knew him to be a vain, unstable man."
Let the Jury only look at these letters, and In conclusion, she said, " I have reason to believe if you
say how could the old gentleman resist - them. had fulfilled your marriage contract yln other other letters she anticipated that when the haps, have treated me unspeakably ill."ou Here,d, then,
family returned to town they would break off the was the lady's own measure of her loss ! Could it be a
marriage. He thought the course pursued when they happy union for her? Could she pretend to say she had
found that the daughters were averse to her introduction suffered so much in the loss of the splendid establish-
into the family, was most: artful, insidious, and impro- ment in Red Lion-square, which had been spoken of
per. He would show, from the letters of the plaintiff, by the law-stationer ? Could she pretend all this, when
that she resorted to the most insidious arts to provoke she herself said that she could anticipate nothing but
the old gentleman to a breach with his family. The ill-treatment ? ' But take her own character. See
plaintiff requests him to break at once frern his cruel fa- how smooth, how coaxing, how submissive she
fully and do her justice • and in another letter she calls could be, as long as she thought it possible to
on him. to fly from the trammels of his base family. accomplish her object. The moment all hope was
On the 12th of July she endeavours to persuade 'him relinquished, that moment dropped the mask from
that he is not the master of his own house, and then her face, and her real countenance and character ap-
she was wicked enough to suggest that the daughter was peared—that moment she. appeared as the little vixen
treating him cruelly—she calls her an unnatural daugh- which these letters indicated her to be. She then pro-
ter, wanting in duty and affection to him. There was a ceeded to the most violent and unmeasured abuse of this
confirmed attempt to undermine the daughter in her old gentleman, for Whom she might have had
father's affection, and to represent herself as being ready some consideration and forbearance on account of
to fill her place. On the 18th July, she says his family his very advanced period, in life, and the unnumbered
had caused him to treat her unchristianly; as the best acts of kindness of which, for nearly four years, she had
means of punighing them,' he was to make them some- been made the subject. Tfiis was the whole of the case
what less .in their portions, and make herself pro- on the part of the defendant which he proposed to offer;
per reparation. In another letter she suggested to he did not, the Jury would observe, contend that the
him that if he did not take care his family would en- defendant was entitled to their verdict. He
deavour to prove him insane. That was the 7th of May, blushed to say that the plaintiff must recover on ac-
-1840, and the letter was of a very important nature, for count of the promises which had been given. His
it contained not less than five postscripts.—(Laughter.) object, however, in introducing the particular part of
She told him in it he was surrounded by spies, the correspondence of the plaintiff, had been to enable
and that she would not submit to a paltry pc- the Jury, in the exercise of a clear 'and dispassionate
cuniary recompence. Now there could be nothing judgment, fully to appreciate the motives which had in-
in his conduct on which to found a charge stigated this unhappy, he had almost said unhallowed
of insanity, except his absurd connexion with her, and attachment, and to award such damages only as they
the voluminous correspondence that had taken place be- thoUght the justice of the case,
.or the conduct
tween them. He thought he had shown that a must dis- of both the parties, deserved at their hands.
graceful, and .unjustifiable clandestine correspondence I sincerely wish (said the Learned Counsel), that
; had been carried on between the parties, and finding_ there was a power in this country, which was pos-
an invincible repugnance to any connexion on the part of sessed in one of the ancient States, of preventing the
his family, they wickedly attempted to poison the old follies and indiscretions which are occasionally corn-
man's mind against his:daughters. He now came to another mitted by persons who have arrived at an advanced pe-
branch of the case in which his Learned Friend had riod of life, by putting them under a careful sort of
shown that, however vacillating and unsettled the de- pupilage—not exactly amounting to the restraint
fendant had shown himself throughout, they had at which it is suggested by this lady that the
length got him to purchase the ring and the li- children of Mr. Rosser might be disposed
cense, and that to throw himself off the hook af- to place on her ; and I am indebted to one of my
torwards was unpardonable, and entitled the plain- Learned Friends for a very apposite passage of a very
tiff to a large measure of damages. But the man- distinguished writer, in which he alludes very particu-
ner in which the ring was procured showed the easy lady to the subject :
gullibity of the old gentleman. On the 2d March the " Children from marriage we by laws restrain,
plaintiff's mother suggested the purchase of a ring, and Why not prevent them when they're such again ?
intended i a statement that he marriage, and had been pre- Why not forbid the doting souls to prove
vented by the opposition of his family, and that the money The indecent fondling of preposterous love ?"
and stock was intended to have been a part of 1
the marriage portion. Oa the 22d of March, the will not, Gentlemen, offer any further
leave the matter
further remarks
mother again returned to the charge, and it would seem
on the conduct of these parties.
that the affair was then entirely off. He was requested
in your hands, with the most entire eonfi-
to write a statement that he intended marriage, and he Hence that you will prevent so dangerous and perilous
did so to get rid of their importunity. Now, it was clear an example as that of a person in the situation of the
from these letters that the engagement was then off, and plaintiff, and with the assistance of her .mother,
that the purchase of the ring was only intended taking advantage of a doting old man to make
as an atonement to the wounded feelings of the plaintiff. a property of him, - drawing him into the snare,
until it was impossible that he could retreat without ex-
In 1836 it appeared that the engagement with Kitchen .
had been broken off. Mrs. Darbon said that she hadthreatening. him,
posing himself to scorn and ridicule, un-
mentionedless lie consented, to do that which' was the original ob-
the subject to Mr. Rosser in 1837, and that .
ect of theparties, and then having the exquisite effrontery
when she again alluded to it in 1840 he appeared to re- J
collect what she had before stated to him. He would to stand up in Court of Justice to demand a verdict
not stop to inquire whether Mr. Rosser had really been in-
that such a case as this could be recommended to an in-
for, tortured feelings and blighted hopes, and to expect
formed.of this affair in 1837, but he would put it to the Jury
telligent and dispassionate Jury. whether, supposing such really to have been the case, it
was not extremely
,probable at Mr. Rosser's advanced The Learned Counsel then put in the letters which
period of lite, that the whole should have escaped his he, had
.refers.ed to in his address. The reading of the
memory. It was the characteristic of old men that they von!m_rnous.tile of very long and wordy letters had oc-
recollected perfectly the transactions of their youth, cupied the time of the Court from about twenty minutes
while they forgot recent occurrences. It was clear, before two o'clock to half-past three, when
from all that had taken place, that if Mr. Rosser Mr. Justice WIGIITMAN asked--Pray, Mr. Thesiger,
had received any communication on the subject in are there many more letters to read ?
1837, he had entirely and completely forgotten it. Mr. THESIGER—A great many more, my' Lord.—
When, however, he found he was completely enclosed (A laugh.) There are those which I have just put
in the net of the family, suspecting that the young lady in, and I know not how many more. On counting
might entertain some lingering attachment for some them I find there are eleven besides,--4A laugh.) Mr,
other individual, he wrote for an explanation, and that Platt insists on them being all read.
explanation .had been afforded by the three letters Mr. Justice WIGIITMAN—WeII, go on.
which had that day been produced, and which she The reading proceeded accordingly, and occupied in
told Mr. Rosser she had preserved, for the pur- all three hours.
poses of affording him every explanation and satis- Mr. PLATT then rose to reply. He said his friend
faction relating to the affair. That statement, how- Mr. Thesiger had told the Jury that attempts had been
ever, struck him (Mr. Thesiger), as-. rather remark- been made by means of newspaper paragraphs and other-
able, for the letters were dated October, 1836, at which wise, to give this case an air of Importance. Now, lie
time the affair with Kitchen was broken off, and the would tell them that it was a case of high importance.
engagement to Mr. Rosser did not take place until 1837. It was a grand example of the excellence of the laws
He would ask if those letters of Mr. Kitchen's, which they lived under, that his humble client, or the humblest
had been read, did not indicate that he -was a and most unprotected of her Majesty's subjects could ob-
young man of the kindest feelings—they showed tain redress and protection against their oppressors, how=
the highest respect for his parents, and the deepest ever wealthy 'and powerful. The instructions which his
feelings of respect and esteem for Miss Sophia Darbon. friend had received to heap abuse upon the unhappy
He (Mr. Thesiger) could not in those letters perceive plaintiff showed that the defendant was still actu-
the slightest ground for suggesting anything reflecting aced by the wish • to insult and injure his
on the character of Mr. Kitchen. Yet how did they 'victim, which he had manifested in his last letters. But
think Miss Sophia Darbon spoke of that young man he had not dared to put into the witness-bok a single
when attracted by a more valuable prize? .In her letter witness, not even a member of his own family, to prove
of 23d April, 1840, addressed to Mr. Rosser, after statini, that the plaintiff had been guilty of any impropriety. If
that she thought she had fully explained to him all the i anything could be proved against her, the shrewd attor-
circumstances alluded to, sufficiently to convince him ! ney of forty years- practice, would have ransacked the
of the non-existence of any previous engagement, she ; country to produce it. There were, indeed, these letters
. said that she had preserved one or two letters, which she I put in evidence, being the last she had received from a
hoped would remove all his scruples. In her letter of 1 young man who paid his addresses to her before the de-
the 29th of April following, enclosing - the letters of fendant made her the offer of his hand. But these let-
Kitchen, she, after explaining the circumstances of ; ters only proved that she rejected the addresses of that
the money transactions between herself and Mr Kitchen, I suitor, and that she had -never given him any encourage-
observed, speaking of Mr. Kitchen, " I entertained I inent. If anything else could have been established from
no sort of regard for him beyond good wishes i all that had passed between her and Mr. Kitchen, the
and ordinary Christian feelings." In her next I Jury would not believe that his friend Mr. Thesiger
letter to Mr. Rosser she spoke of Mr. Kitchen as I would have failed to bring the proof before them. He
a " degraded being," stated " she was too horror-struck i would not have omitted to produce the young man him-
at his (Kitchen's) addresses not to feel thankful that 4 self. Let them look at the history of the case. They
since 1836 she had lost all clue to so despicable found that in 1821 the mother of the plaintiff, having
a fellow ; that she thanked God for her escape failed in business, retired with her three daughters to a
from so degraded a creature. His Learned Friend country village, where they all lived together in seclu-
had yesterday, in commenting on one of the sion, upon the scanty pittance bequeathed to the daugh-
letters of Mr. Rosser, written after the commencement tors, the mother not possessing a shilling in the world.
of the present action, made use of no very mild terms Here they lived in honourable respectability and peace,
in characterizing certain expressions therein made use until after the death of the defendant's wife in 1837,
i
of, alluding to the young lady's escape from destruction, when he invaded their retirement, and made them, by
body and soul, and had challenged him (Mr. T.) to pro- his constant attentions, and his visits, with every display
duce any passage from the young lady's letter, warranting of wealth, an object of curiosity, if not of suspicion, to
such an expression. He accepted the challenge, and would the villagers around them. The Jury had seen that he
now read a passage from the young lady's letters, which was received in the first instance, and for a long time,
was a complete justification. In her letter of June 30, with reluctance ; but the situation of the family with re-
-1838, alluding to this attachment, she said, "I am well spect to him, and the kindness they had received from
assured that it was a particular interference of Provi- him for many years in the management of their funded
dente alone that shields me from total destruc- and other property,, rendered it very difficult to give him
tion, body and soul, if you knew all ; and that repulse, which, it was suggested, on the other side,
fortified my spirit to spurn with indignation the treat- the circumstances called for. But how came the de-
ment that was threatened to unsullied and indigent vir- fendant to instruct his Counsel to pronounce it disgrace-
. tue." That letter also contained a passage showing that ful on the part of the plaintiff to listen to such a Proposal
Mrs. Darbon herself had nut been altogether blameless. from a man whose wife was not yet one month dead ?
It was as follows :—"lt was my mother's imprudence- If it was disgraceful in that young woman to listen to
that exposed me to all those miseries." Mr. Rosser such a proposal from a man who had known her for nine-
could not believe that this attempt to blacken the cha- teen years, and whom she had been taught to regard
raster of Mr. Kitchen was part of the artifice. He (Mr. with gratitude and reverence—how disgraceful was it for
Thes4,ser) should show them that nothwithstanding all his him to make the offer ? He had known the 'plaintiff
Learned Friend had said of her ardentaffection for this old since she was nine years of age, and he must have been
man,the gratification of which alone she sought, was influ- able to judge whether she merited that excellent charac-
enced by mercenary motives, he should show that from ter which he alleged as his excuse for desiring to secure
beginning to end her views and those of her family had her for his wife. FroM the time of his first offer he
been directed solely against his property. He had Leen -never ceased to invade the retirement of this family,
foolish enough to tell them shortly after the acquaint- whose peace had now been broken up for ever by his
ante commenced, that he was possessed of considerable 'treacherous conduct. No less than 400 letters had been
wealth, and from that hour they had determined received from him, up to the time when he thought pro-
to place him such a position as might make him a pro- per, without any fault on the part of the plaintiff; to
fitable speculation for all of them. On the 22d of No- break off his engagement, and thus leave her and her
umber 1839, the cloven foot appeared. They had family objects of derision andcontempt to allaround them.
at that time advanced a considerable way in It was said that the defendant had come to that period
their design, although they had not got quite so far as of life at which the vigour of his mind was impaired.
the purchase of the license and the ring. At that time it But there was no evidence to justify that allegation.
appeared Mr. Rosser had shown symptoms of retie:- The letters of the defendant did not justify it ; and it
ing, and they determined to retain him, by appealing , was not borne out by the statements of those who had
'at once to his feelings and his fears. The young I been in constant comniunicationl with him. Tho whole
lady, in her letter of November 22, 1839, after saying conduct of the defendant indicated more of the cunning
she could not believe Mr. Rosser after his many broken 1 of the serpent than the imbecility of old age ; that cull-
promises, proceeded :—" The least you can do is to end 1 ning was indicated by the appointments with the young
the affair by making a handsome settlement upon me. 1 lady which he had made, and by the manner in which he
It must not be by your will, for that you may alter. If I bad arranged them. It was indicated by his recommen-
you do not settle enough, the only thing you can do. is ; dations of a residence lie having in all cases advised the
to marry me. lam entitled to a handsome settlement : family to fix their abode in some place in his own neigh-
for your breach of promise of marriage. Your letters ' bourhood, or over which he miht be supposed to have
produced in Court would of
me heavy damages. ! sonic control. The very favours with which lie had
It is all the consequence of your own folly in list- ; bosded her might have been conferred for the purpose of
ening to the advice of friends. You had better, : Subjugating her to his wishes ; and that was the very
to secure yourself from public ridicule, marry i course which a man with dishonourable intentions might
concluding paragraph
me." So that this young lady who was so full of : be supposed to pursue. All his promises of waking her
affection for this old man, told him that his making love ; his wife were but masks to conceal his real designs,
to her must expose him to public ridicule. The .i and his protestations of religion and morality
"If you still of the letter was as follows : ; only showed. that he was persuaded that it was
refuse to marry me or to make a handsome i not a" profligate with whom he had to deal. That
settlement upon m d ' •to mortify ! would not have been the first time that religious
P.S. I would aecCepetpend upon it I will, t your daughters, inform them of the Bank moneys.— i enthusiasm had been assumed as a u:ask for carnal sin ;
a year, in addition to
sequent letters she threatenedentl
,tohfe;atm,bond for sixty pounds I and if such were the purposes of the defendant no pecu-
yiimpoimmidths.'inflenrelsuiebg- I,dneiaerpy. loAss could be baennaesiufficient punishment for infamy so
his family of theitiank money
ne de e tdo
thatth e plaintiff
s, to show, as she said, how I after the defendant had'3'arthlaedngbtehenanonffoeur she had cheated them, and was constantly holding a ! no intention or completing his engagement; that offer
writ over his head, in teriairern. After hooking her ' the plaintiff had Very properly rejected. She was Mr.
gudgeon still snore completely, she induced . hini ',Rosser's affianced wile, and as such she was entitled to a
,she rto purchaseuse
her de the licensande and , the • ring, when i provision as large as if their marriage had been actually
in ms. Iu one of her letters 'solemnized. But the oflbr in question waft in no way

suited to the affluence of the defendant. It should not be
forgotten that, according to the contract between the par-
ties, the plaintiff would have been entitled to no provision
of any kind in the event of her surviving the defendant,
unless' he had thought fit, after their marriage, to sign a
deed in her behalf. That was the consequence of the
English law of conveyancing, with which the defendant
was well acquainted; and it was under those circum-
stances that the plaintiff was ready to place all
her hopes of worldly happiness entirely in -his hands.
And yet that was the woman against whom the charge
of selfish and interested motives had been laid ! But
the defendant had assigned as one of his reasons for
violating the promises he had made, that he had been
informed that the plaintiff had held communication with
a stranger in the streets, and that she had a conversa-
tion with an officer in the navy, under circumstances of
a suspicious and improper kind. Now that charge was
a grave one, and might well be held to disqualify the
plaintiff from urging those claims which she might
otherwise possess. But the charge, heinous as it was in
its character, had not been substantiated by one tittle of
proof. Mr. Rosser alleged that he had received infor-
mation to that effect ; but the name of the informant
was not mentioned, and no witness whatever was called
to established the fact. Was not this a case of injury fol-
lowed by insult, and if they believed this canting old hy-
pocrite had from the beginning intended to treat a vir-
tuous and unsuspecting girl in such a manner, how could
they sufficiently express their disgust at such conduct ?
But if they shouhl be of opinion that his intentions had
originally been honourable, but that afterwards he wished
to get out of his engagement, then he could not be per•
!flitted to do so without making her a handsome compen-
sation. The comfort, the honour, nay, the life of his un-
fortunate client, depended on their verdict. His Learned
Friend had sneered at the evidence given by the milliner
as to the personal appearance of his unfortunate client.
Was it not evident she was taken to the shop solely to be
identified as the person who accompanied Mr. Rosser on
a former occasion? But what did they say to the evidence
of Mrs. Bennett, who was a person of the greatest re-
spectability ? The plaintiff was an object of deep corn •
passion. She was living with her mother in 1837, in a
state almost approaching to penury. Her conduct to her
mother was exemplary ; and what better earnest could
there be of a woman making a good wife than that she
performed her duty to her parents ? Mr. Rosser knew
that, and daring the lifetime of his wife, so high an
opinion did he entertain of the plaintiff, that he offered
to conduct the affairs_of' the family at the winding up
the account of the executors. There was then Mr.
Rosser's own evidence to her character, up to the time
that he invaded their quiet cottage. Shocked at first at
Mr. Rosser's so soon forgetting his partner for fifty years,
they were induced at last by his importunities to
admit his addresses. All the parish of Hampton
knew of the engagement, and . then the match was
broken off. All he asked was, that he should perform
his contract : he refused to perform that solemn engage-
ment. After exhausting four pars of his life, he came
into Court, and the lady had no object in acquiesing in
his request but to obtain money. Was she not, there-
fore, an object of compassion ? What could they think
of the taste of any gentleman, when a question of mar-
riage arose between him and a lady, to call her action a
Pickwickery action ? Could anything be more vulgar ?
As an honourable man, Mr. Rosier should not have
pleaded to the action ; he should hove said, I have
broken my compact, and let a Sheriff's Jury assess the
damages ; but, instead of that, he endeavours to terrify
the mother and the daughter, and pleads four or five false
pleas. A more lawyer-like sort of defence was never seen.
It smacked of the attorney's office. The first thing
he pleaded was that he had never entered into a con-
tract—that had been proved. The second' plea was, that
he had been 'pholly exonerated. What was the meaning
of that ? All the letters showed that, so far from being
exonerated, she had always insisted on his performing
his contract. There was no evidence of any absolution
from the contract. For what purpose could those pleas
have been placed upon the record except to alarm the
legal adviser of the plaintiff? but he was a person not to
be frightened. He felt he could trust to whatever the
plaintiff told him, and he challenged them to prove these
false averments. They had not attempted to do so.
There was another plea, that the 3661. Consols was re-
ceived in satisfaction of the breach of these contracts. Were
they prepared to find that, when the money had been paid
before the breach had been made, when the money had been
paid before the later contracts had been entered into?
Could they approve of the conduct of Mr. Rosser to
this lady, who had no father and no brother to vindicate
her rights ? He thought they must see the plaintiff
was an object of 'great compassion, because, if they did
not give her an adequate amount of damages, Mr.
Rosser would have obtained a victory over her. If his
object had originally been an improper one, no amount
of damages could be too high ; but if he had originally
intended to make her his wife, she was entitled to re-
ceive, not only an amount of damages sufficient to re-
munerate her for the station she had failed to obtain as
his wife, but also to compensation for the misery and suf-
fering she had endured, and for the injury he (Mr.Rosscr)
had attempted to do to her character. They were called on to
perform an important duty. If they dismissed the plaintiff
with disgrace, they would be inflicting on her a life of
ignominy, but he was certain they never could do so.
No British- Jury would come to a conclusion branding
the character of a fellow-subject without any evidence,
and they had no evidence to brand his client in the pre-
sent case, and he trusted to them to pronounce 'such a
verdict as would adequately compensate' her for what
she had suffered.
Mr. Justice \VIGIITSIAN in summing- up, said he sin-
cerely congratulated the Jury on the approaching to a
conclusion of this most tedious cause. It Would not be
necessary to go through the eVidence; the pleas had
none of them been made out. It was -evident a promise
had been given, that the defendant had never been re-
..
leased from his promise, and that the money had 'not
been accepted as a release from that promise. The
only question, therefore, would be that of damages.
The Learned Judge then proceeded to relate the circum-
stances of the case, as they have been detailed in evidence.
The correspondence was one of the most extraordinary
series of letters ever read. Sometimes the plaintiff re-
pented of his engagement, and then lie repented of his
repeutance ; and these changes took place so frequently
that it appeared that the plaintiff really had hardly bad
time enough to make her mind up as to what course she
could pareue. It appeared, however, that the defendant
had all along some fears of what his family might say to
this engagement • that the plaintiff was aware of this,
and that she took no steps to inform- his family of what
was going on. His daughters, no doubt, frequently re-
monstrated against the engagement, and this remon-
strance appeared to have produced a great effect on Mr.
Rosser's mind. There did not seem to be the
shadow of an imputation on the character of the plaintiff.
With regard to the affair of Kitchen it was evident that
she had refused him long before she accepted Rosser,
and there was no imputation whatever on her character.
The history of the engagement would best be learnt from
Mrs. Darbon's evidence, which he would read to the
Jury. (Having read Mrs. Darbon's testimony, the
Learned Judge proceeded). Whatever they might
think of the nature of such a connection, as far as a set-
tlement in life went there could be no doubt but the
marriage would have been an advantageous thing for
plaintiff. His Lordship then read one of the defendant's
letters, in 1839, from which his Lordship thought it
was evident that he was still as much attached to the
plaintiff as ever, and only prevented from fulfilling his
engagement with her by his very natural unwillingness
to inflict additional pain upon his daughter, whose
health had already been much impaired in the -struggle.
However, he did afterwards renew his promise,
and went so far as to procure a license. It
was for the Jury to consider how far the plaintiff, a
young woman of 29 years of age, could be supposed to
have suffered in her affections, by being disappointed of
a marriage with a man of 83. But it appeared after all
to be the real consideration for them, whether this was
one of the cases in which worldly compensation could
•be applied, and then what amount would be sufficient to
.compensate the plaintiff for the annoyance and vexations
she had suffered, and the injury done to her feelings,
by the defendant's playing fast and loose with her for
so long a time. In that light the matter seemed to have
been viewed by 'both the parties at several periods,
the question having been discussed between them
so far back as 1839, how much would be
an adequate settlement for her, to satisfy her for
her disappointment ? Sixty pounds a-year was
offered by the defendant, and the plaintiff held out for
1001., so that the latter may be supposed to be the
estimate she put upon what she would feel a compensa-
tion at that time. The correspondence, however, had
been renewed, a ring and license had been bought, and
two years more had passed in some suspense. -All these
were considerations for the Jury in awarding damages.
In their hands he now left the case. There was no
question whatever but as to the amount of damages, as
the verdict must be for the plaintiff on all the counts.
The foreman inquired if the stock (6661. in the Globo
Insurance) stood in the plaintiff's name ?
his Loansuir replied in the affirmative.
The Jury then retired, at half-past seven o'clock, and
at a quarter
.to nine returned a verdict for the plaintiff,
Damages 1,600/.

- COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Dec. 8.
WOOD AND ANOTHER v. PARKIN.
This was an action brought by Messrs. Wood and
Ellis, solicitors, to recover the balance of an account for
work and labour done, amounting to 3951. 18s. 4d.
Mr. George, and another clerk to the plaintiffs; proved
that the work charged in the bill which had' been deli;
vered had been done. It consisted in soliciting a patent
for wood paving and paying the espences incident
thereto ; the money out of pocket Was,upwards of 2001.
In his cross-examination by the defendant, who up-
, poured in person, the witness denied any knowledge of
any agreement between the defendant and Mr. Wood,
that the firm were to make up a direction for the Com-
pany that was proposed to be tOrmed, and that if . they
failed they should charge nothing—if they did succeed
they were to be appointed solicitors to the Company.
The defendant was pursuing this line of cross-examina-
tion, but in so irregular a manner that his Lordship in.•
terft red.
In a- very short address to the Jury the defendant re-
peated the above statement, but acknowledged he could not
prove it. He complained that the plaintiffs had, contrary
to his instructions, completed a patent that wits useless,
and gave up the proceedings for a patent that would have
been most valuable, and said he had entered into an ar-
rangement with a Mr. Grub, by which he was to be re-
leased from all responsibility.
His LORDSHIP (Baron Gurney) said, in fact, the cause
was undefended, and from the specimen of the waste of
time which had taken place then, the jury would be sa-
tisfied that if all persons abstained from employing 0-
vocates, 365 days in a year would not be enough to try
the causes which came before them.
The Jury immediately found a verdict for the sum
claimed.

'BARRETT v. ABBOTT.
Mr. Sergeant Ikumow stated that this was a horse
cause, but both parties-were highly- respectable gentle-
men engaged in the practice of the law, and both car-

rying on business in Doctors' Commons. In February
last the defendant was in possession of a mare which he
said was too quiet for him. The plaintiff wished for
such a horse, and upon the representation of the defen-
dant as to the perfect quietness of the mare, purchased
her for 10/. She was delivered on a Saturday at the
latter end of February—next day she was put into the
chaise with the intention of driving from Tottenham to
Hampstead; the moment the groom left her head she started
off at full speed, and nothing stopped this quiet mare but
the heavy roads, and the still heavier hill, at the end of
the journey. A few days after she was again put into
the chaise, in which the defendant and his -son drove to
town. On the road she started off, and nothing stopped
her until both were thrown out, and the chaise dashed
to pieces. The plaintiff was injured on the head and
arm, and his son on the knee. Of course he could not
drive the mare again ; and as the defendant refused to
take her back, she was sold. The plaintiff sought to re-
cover for the damage done, for the money paid for the
horse, allowing for what she fetched, for the keep of the
horse until she was sold, and for such other damage as
the Jury thought he was entitled to.
The ease, as stated, was proved by the son of the
plaintiff, and an inspector of police, who saw the latter
accident.

A farrier at Tottenham had been employed to shoe
the mare in question ; it was anything but a pleasant
operation, for without the very greatest care she would
have knocked him into one forge while she remained- in
the other.—(A laugh.)
Wm. Groombridge, son of the livery-stable keeper,
drove the mare at the latter end of March. Without any
cause she ran away and began kicking—she was very
violent. He had been used to driving 14 years.
An hostler from Stanmore, where the defendant re,
sided, gave evidence of her running away while in th
possession of the defendant. The cost of repairing the
chaise was proved to be 71. 10s. ; it could not be shown
what was got for the horse, as sun had been bartered.
A gentleman behind the bar addressed the Jury for
the defendant, and contended that the evidence clearly
proved that the mare at the same time of the sale was
perfectly quiet, and that she had been frightened subse.
quently. He called the grooni and • footman of tl'
defendant, his brother-in-law, who was the attorney in
the cause, his father, and a Mr. Oliphant, all of whom
had frequently seen and ridden behind the mare. She
was perfectly free from vice, and was perfectly quiet.
On only one occasion did they speak to the mare having
been driven in single harness.
Mr. Sergeant LUDLOW replied, and his Lordship
having summed up, the Jury found for the plaintiff
damages 101.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 8.
PARKER V. TAYLOR.
This was an action of trespass under the Interpleader
Act. The defendant having obtained judgment
upon a bill of exchange against a person named
Stockbridge, residing in Clapham, put in an exe-
cution, and leVied the amount ,of the judgment
debt, notwithstanding the protest of the plaintiff, Par-
ker,- who claimed the goods seized as his, under a bill
of sale and transfer alleged to have been executed to
him on the 10th of August, the day before the seizure
by Stockbridge, who was his brother-in-law. The bill
of sale was alleged to have been executed in satisfaction
of a debt of long standing. The goods having been sold
under plaintiff's protest, under these circumstances he
brought the present action.
The defence was, that the whole proceedings between
the plaintifl'and Stockbridge was a contrivance to defraud
the other creditors, the allegation of debt resting
only on the evidence of Stockbridge himself, and the
transfer having been made subsequently to the judgment
obtainel by th defendant, when the execution was im-
minent, and only the day before it was levied.