The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-29 00:00:00

IN RE SIR WM. BOYD.

Mr. THOMAS had been instructed to apply to the Court
for an order to stay the sale of certain articles of jewellery,
which were to be sold by auction by Mr. Cafe that day,
at one o'clock. The insolvent, Sir Wm. Boyd, had
stated in his schedule that that property had been given
away to friends in Scotland, but it turned out that it had
been pledged with a pawnbroker.
The Court granted the order to stay the sale, with the
understanding that, if ➢lr. Cafe required it, the sum he
had paid for the redemption of the property, should be
paid to him and meantime he was to detain the jewellery
till the further orders of the Court.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NORTHERN CIRCUIT—Durham, July 26.
(Before Lord PENMAN.)
HUNTON V. SNAITH.
This was an action to recover damages for breach o
promise of marriage. Mr. Dundas and Mr. Watson ap-
peared for the plaintiff, and Sir G. Lewin for the de-
fendant.

Mr. DUNDAS stated the plaintiff's case to the jury, and
in so doing said, the conduct of the defendant would be
shown, from the evidence he should lay before the jury,
to have been most unhandsome and heartless, and she
was now obliged to adopt the present mode of obtaining
compensation from the man by whom she had been first
deceived, and then betrayed. The defendant pleaded that
he did not make the promise, and of that fact there would,
however, be ample proof—fulfil it he could not, as he
had since married another. He had won the affections
of this young woman ; she became pregnant and, pro-
duced a child ; the was then deserted, anel another was
made his wife. The plaintiff is now about twenty-five
years old, the daughter of a grocer at Stockton,
a persOn respectable, though in humble circumstances,
who, having several children, the plaintiff was under
the necessity of endeavouring to gain her livelihood at
service. She went in the capacity of housekeeper to an
uncle at Bradford, where she fulfilled the duties of that
station without reproach for several years. On his death
she returned to her father's house, and shortly after was
introduced by the mother of the defendant, who was her
aunt, to the house of the defendant. He bad shortly be-
fore lost his wife, and stood in need of the services of a '
housekeeper. In August last the plaintiff; with the
mother of the defendant, went to his residence at Bel-
tringham, near HeXharn, in Northumberland, and it was
then arranged that she should remain there at least dur-
ing the coming harvest, and assist in his household affairs.
During that visit it did unfortunately happen that she be-
came pregnant by him. She returned to her father's house
on the 22d of December. The defendant, before her de-
parture, had repeatedly promised her marriage. This cir-
cumstance she imparted to her friends, a wedding dress
was bought, and other preparations made for that event.
On the 14th of January he came to her father's house, appa-
rently for the purpose of fulfilling his promise, but in the
course of his arrangements with her father, it appeared
that the chief motive in his mind was the money he might
expect as her fortune, and upon this paltry considera-
tion it was that he openly violated his solemn engage-
ment. Her father informed him that lie had a large
family, and would not be able to give any portion with
his daughter, though he intended to divide his property
among them equally at his death. The defendant re-
mained at the house from the Friday when he arrived
till the Monday following, when he disappeared. In
the agitation consequent upon this event the pregnancy
of the plaintiff was discovered. In a moment of anger,
her father turned her from his door, and she took refuge
at Houghton, in the house of her aunt, the mother of
the defendant. There she was delivered. Several letters
had passed between the parties, in which the relation in
which thy stood would be sufficiently manifest to the
Jury. One was directed to the plaintiff at her father's
house before the engagement was broken off, couched in
the usual terms on such occasions. Another she re-
ceived after she went to his mother's ; it said, " I have

sent you all your clothes that I could find, and am sorry
for you. Your father may blame himself. lam blame-
able ; but our union, which might have taken place, is
now hopeless." After some further expressions, he
added, °•I do detest your father's obstinacy." This, there-
fore, was the paltry consideration which principally
weighed to induce the violation of his promise, and was no
doubt the object which he had in view in the engagement
which he subsequently contracted. A letter written to
his parents after his marriage, dated the 4th of February,
mentions that he had contracted matrimony, and says
that he supposes Margaret, the plaintiff, has left their
house, and intimates his intention to befriend her so far
as money was concerned, and adds in the exultation of
gratified avarice, " I am perfectly satisfied up to this
time, fortune a thousand." It would appear that besides
the property which he thus obtained, he had consider-
able possessions of his own, and he, the Learned Coun-
sel, hoped that out of this money, which he had made his
God, the Jury would award ample compensation to the
plaintiff, whom he had so grievously wronged and so
basely deserted.
The Learned Counsel then called several witnesses,
and adduced the evidence necessary to sustain his case.
The defendant had, it appeared, subsequently to the com-
mencement of the action, called on a distant connexion
of the family, and expressed a wish to settle the matter,
as it was a family affiiir, and he did not like the expo-
sure of the public press.
Sir G. LEWIN, for the defendant, contended that the
Jury had not sufficient evidence of any absolute promise
on the part of the defendant ; and the promise which he
made, if he made any at all, was rather conditional on
the father's advancing a portion with his daughter. He
would, however, adduce further evidence, to show that
the plaintiff had repeatedly admitted no such promise
had been made. If; however, the Jury should be of opi-
nion that it was made out, it would be his duty to lay
before them the character of the plaintiff, which was not
such as to entitle her to more than the smallest possible
damages that they could award. The Learned Counsel
then called the mother of the defendant to show that the
plaintiff had accompanied her uninvited on her visit to
Beltringham ; that a few days after her arrival she be-
came so intoxicated as not to know what she was about,

and that the witness on going down stairs after she sup-
posed all had retired to bed, found her upon the sofa with
the defendant. She refused to return to Houghton with
the witness, but insisted on remaining.
Other witnesses were called to prove admissions by
the plaintiff that the defendant had never promised her
marriage, as also to accuse her of levity of conduct with
other persons. One of these deposed to a flagrant act of
the kind in November last, but the witnesses spake only
of occurrences since she left the defendant's residence.
_ _

Mr. DLINDAS, in his reply, commented strongly upon
the course taken for the defence, and the improbability
of the statement laid before them.

The Learned JUDGE having summed up the case the
Jury, after a short retirement, returned with a verdict
for the plaintiff—damages, 2501.

NORFOLK ClRCUlT—Norwich, July 26.
(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
WILLIMOST V. READ.
This was an action for breach of promise of marriage,
to which the defendant pleaded that he made no such
promise ; and secondly, that after the making of the
promise the plaintiff conducted herself in an improper
manner, and became pregnant by some person to him
unknown.
Mr. Palmer and Mr. C. Cooper were counsel for the
plaintiff ; Mr. Andrews and Mr. W. Cooper for the de-
fendant.
The plaintiff is a young woman of the age of 24, and
carries on the business of a bonnet-maker at Dereham ;
the defendant is a farmer living near that town. The
defendant had been in habits of friendly intercourse
with the plaintiff's family for ten years, but no express
promise to marry her was shown previously to the time
of her coming, in a state of pregnancy, from London.
In March, 1840, she went to town, whence she returned
home pregnant. In September following, the defendant
went to the house of the lady's father, at a time when
she was not only pregnant, but visibly so. . The father
asked him when he intended to marry his daughter, as
he thought it was high time he did something, and he
replied he would do so before Christmas. The father
wished to know, " why not then, to prevent accidents,"
and on the defendant saying it was not convenient, his
father-in-law that wished to be said he would support
her for a year or two, to which the defendant made no
reply. The plaintiff's mother was at this time in much
distress, and the defendant told her not to be angry with
her daughter, for he was the first man that had be-
haved improperly with her : lie then left the house,
Christmas came, but no marriage came with it, and be.
fore the arrival of that festival, the plaintiff gave birth to
a youthful " lord of the creation." In the February fol-
lowing, the plaintiff being ill and in bed, the defendant
went up stairs to see her, when she told him she was very
unwell, and asked " what would become of her child if
she should die ?" He said he would take it home, it
should come to no harm, and desired her not to fret. The
plaintiff then wished to know what was to become of her
if she got better, and he replied he would take her home
and make her comfortable. "Ah !" said she, " but in
what way ?" and he told her he would marry her with-
out fail. He was much affected at this time and crying
and nursed the child for a quarter of an hour, observing
with something like paternal pride and partiality that it
was "an uncommon fine child to be sure." The plain-
tiff got well, but the defendant did not marry her and
take her home, and make her comfortable, but on the
contrary his attorney refused for him, in reply to a re-
quest, on the part of her attorney, that he should do so
forthwith.
On the part of the defendant, some evidence was
called for the purpose of showing that the plaintiff was a
person of light conduct and demeanour. It was stated
that just before the time of her going to town she was
drinking tea with a neighbour, and whilst she was there
the neighbour's son called her out of the room, and they
took a walk together. An aunt of her's, who had quar-
relled with her family, also stated that she had often
seen her walking with one Robert Halliday in the public
streets, and once in the churchyard of Dereham. But
no evidence of any improper act or expression was given.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON, in summing up the evidence,
told the Jury that the pleas of justification had not been
sustained by the evidence, and that the only questions
for their consideration were, whether the plaintiff had
proved a promise of marriage, and if she had, to what
damages she was entitled.
The Jury, after a short deliberation, found a verdict
for the plaintiff, with 501. damages.
This case occupied a considerable portion of time ;
the rest of the day in the Civil Court was spent in the
trying of trifling actions for debts, of interest to the
litigant partied, but to no one else, unless it be the pro-
fessional men.
In the Crown Court, Mr. Justice Williams has been
relieving the criminal calendar by trying short and un-
interesting cases.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.
_

On Tuesday Charlotte Clements, a. n old woman, was
brought up on a charge of begging. •
The charge was no sooner made than the wretched
prisoner, made bold and almost eloquent by hunger and
extreme distress, exclaimed—" Well, if I did beg, is it
not better to beg than to steal ? One or the other I must
do, or I must starve. I have not a bit to eat. I have
not a place in which to put my head. I have not a rag
to put on. What must I do ?" She cried, and her
voice rang through the Court.
Alderman Kelly was much affected, and evidently puz-
zled to answer her question.
" Look at my body," said she, raising her arms, which
were each thrust into an old stocking leg, and turning
herself round in the dock, exhibiting her breast and her
back, covered only with a piece of ragged linen—no
dress, shoes, nor anything.
" Now tell me," said she, with great vehemence, the
tears streaming down her aged cheeks, " what am I to
do? I could sell little things, but they must be bought ;
and if I go to beg the money, I am seized and taken to
prison."

Alderman KELLY—Where is your home ? Prisoner
—Have I not said I have none.

Alderman KELLY--But you surely know where you
come from ? Prisoner—Oh, yes, I know that. I come
from Hunslet, near Leeds.

One of the clerks stated that she was sent down to
Hunslet some time ago, but had returned.
Alderman KELLY—Why did you return ? Prisoner
—l'll tell you why. My daughter, the only child I had
left out of 13, was taken up and transported. She was
innocent, I know she was, as you, Sir, who never saw
her. But before she went I came to London to see her.
That was not a guilty act, was it ?
Alderman KELLY—Have you no friends at Hunslet ?
Prisoner—None. Father, mother, brother, sister, hus-
band, and children, all are gone. I have not a friend in
the world, but God Almighty above me ; and sometimes
I think he is hard upon me to take all away and leave me
behind.
The worthy Alderman ordered the keeper of Bride-
well to take charge of her for a few days, and supply her
with clothes. Afterwards they must see if something
could not be done for her.

BOW-STREET.
On Tuesday a young man, named Thomas Lake Wills,
son of a captain in the marine service, was brought be-
fore Mr. Twyford, by Peak, a constable in the service
of the General Post-office, charged with stealing a letter
containing a 101. note, which came into his possession as
clerk in the establishment.

Mr. Peacock, solicitor to the Post-office, conducted the
prosecution.
Mr. W. T. Henderson, manager of the London and
Westminster Bank, in Lothbury, stated that on Thursday
or Friday last the prisoner came to his room in the bank,
and handed him the 101. Dorset note produced, dated the
Ist of February, 1837, No. 248, which he said he had
found in Blackfriars-road.

Mr. W. Blott, clerk in the Inland-office, proved that
he note produced, which he believed, from information
le had received, to have been sent from Frome on the

16th instant, was addressed to Sheerness, but it never
reached its destination. The prisoner was clerk in the
Inland-office, and had been on duty in the Ramsgate dis-
trict on the evening of the 17th instant, through which
the letter would have passed. Witness was present on
Monday last, when he was asked if he had peen to the
London and Westminster Bank about a note, and after
being cautioned, he said he had, and that he had found
the note in Blackfriars-road, about half-past 11 on Thurs-
day morning last. He also said, he had gone to the
, "Westminster Bank about it, where he saw the last wit-
ness, who took the particulars of the note, which he
gave to a gentleman with his name and address on a
piece of paper. On being further questioned, he said he
had given the note to the gentleman who had called with
the piece of paper from the London and Westminster
Bank about it. The name of the gentleman was Roberts,
of Devonshire-place, Camberwell, from whom he re-
ceived a memorandum of the note, which he subsequently
destroyed.
Constable Peak, after confirming the statement of the

MORNING SUN,

last witness as to the occurrence which took place at his
lodging, and the account he gave of the note, proes;e4
a medal, on which was, engraved, "'lndependentßoyal
Sussex Lodge or Gild- rellows, Brother Drinkwater,
Guardian," together with several -other small articles.
On asking him. if he had made any presents to the lA'
residing at. 41, North-Street, Lambeth, be said he had
not. Witness next went to the' house alluded to in
North-street, where after some conversation with Mrr.
Ashbee and her daughter, they went up stairs, and the
young lady pointed out a drawer, in which he found five
of
,
gold rings, twenty-seven sovereigns and a half, a pair
tortoise-shell sidec-ombs, set in pearl, a gold brooch, a lady's
green Russia leather companion, some pieces of copper.
on one of which the name of "Harris ' was enoTaredt
together with sundry small articles produced. There
was no reluctance on the part of the females to giro wit-
ness every information he required.
The prisoner declined making any defence, but re-
quested that certain members of his family might be
allowed access to him while in prison, which being ac-
ceded to, upon the application of Mr. Peacock he was or-
dered to be remanded for a week.
It was stated that the prisoner and the young female,
Miss Ashbee, were to be united in marriage in a few
days, but that his father, who was present during the ex-
amination, was adverse to the match.

THE MARKETS-YESTERDAY•
CORN EXCHANGE.
There have been moderate arrivals of English Grain sine.
Monday, and considerable of Foreign Wheat. The weatber
being still favourable tendril to make the buyers cautious, an,
there was a very slot,' rate for all kinds of Corn at Monday.%
prices. Flour met a moderate demand at the late advance la
prices.
NEWGATE AND LEADENHALL.
Meat of all d*criptions vas at the last prices, and the de-
mand dull for all kinds. No change took place in Poultry, be!
trade was good, and the supplies fair. Eggs, good supplies at
previous rates.

COLONIAL MARKET.
rates for most articles, although a
and obtained full rliZ
There was little life in the Market, but holders were firm'
quantity of produce was offered at public sale. The Sr mit
were larger than br several days for raw sugar, previous r
were asked but the Market was rather quiet.
TEA MA RK T h
The demand was limited, hut holders refused to submit 0
-111
any further decline, and the small parcels sold were at ,(l's;h.
rates. Company's Congou moved off quietly at 2s. 314 cash.
OW
TALL MAR. y Cdle
Prices kept up, but the Market was qET uiet. P. -• three
on the spot was held for 457. 6d., and for delivery ja
months, 475. 9d. was asked.
COAL M
Ships arrived since 1
a. d..
Hebburn Main l7 ti
Liolyweil Man l7
Nelson's West Hartley
New
New Tantield Moor l5
Old Taiifield
Ord's Redhugh l5 C.
l'anfleld Moor 2O
West Pelaw.... lt 6 last an
West Hartley ........ l9 0
Wylath ...... ............. Iti e
Walls End Clennell
Walls End Heaton l9 1.
End:Hedley
Walls End Killingworth
Walls End Newmarch 17
Walls End Northu berla .d 17
Walls End Riddell's. lB 9 1

ARKET.
last market days 300

~ d_.

tt
Walls
W.
ss.
EEnddud y:l:l'twoe 11'11 -0:
Walk End Lambton ......... 19 9
Walls End Whitwell ......... 0
Walls End Caridoc ............ 0.
' .....
Walls End tiattlepoo .. 9
Tennant's Hartlepool ......... .20
0
Walls End Adelaide .......... 9
Walls End Barrett ......... .• ; . !! 0
Walls End Brown's Deane 11
Walls End Cornfotth .... .. ...
Walls End Richardson', Len;s o 6
Wal s End lees ............... I
Hartley ................... ." 15 9
Howard's Netheron 6
Holywtll Trader ............... !t;
Killingworth Trader .....