The Sun.
London, England, 1848-05-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF EXCHE (2 UER, May 16.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before the CHIEF Beaos and a
. .

Special Jury.)
ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. FIlimAN.
This was an information filed by the Attorney-
General against Sarah Firman, to obtain the condemna-
tion of 625 gallons of sweet spirits of nitre, and 93
carboys in which it was contained.
The Solicitor-General conducted the case for the
Crown, and Mr. Martin appeared for the defendant.
It appeared that the spirit in question was manu-
factured by a person of the name of Bailey, who kept a
distillery in Globe-road, which in 1845 was entered by
the Excise officers, and the spirits and apparatus seized,
in consequence of the distillery
not having been properly
entered at the Excise-office. Subsequently the defend-
ant's house was entered, and the 625 gallons of spirit
and the 93 carboys were also seized. The main ques-
tion in the case was whether sweet spirits of nitre was a.
spirit within the meaning of the law and liable to a duty.
The JUDGE told the jury that he was of opinion that
sweet spirits of nitre was entirely an article of commerce,
perfectly well known and distinguishable from spirits,
and treated as such by several enactments; but he left
it to them to say whether it was in their opinion a
mechanical mixture or a chemical combination. If they
were of opinion that the spirit was in an uncombined
state they would find for the Crown, but if they were
not satisfied on that point their verdict ought to be for
the defendant. _ .

The jury found for the defendant.
A bill of exceptions was tendered by the Crown.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, May 16.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Westminster, before Lord
Chief Justice WILDE and a Common Jury.)
BLACK V. CARR.

This was an action fora breach of promise of marriage.
The defendant pleaded that he did not make the pro-
mise, and a special plea of fraud.
Mr. Sergeant Byles and Mr. Wordsworth appeared
for the plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Talfourd for the de-
fendant.

The Learned COUNSEL for the plaintiff briefly opened
the case, the facts of which will be found in the evidence.
Mrs. Jane Miller stated that she was the wife of Mr.
W. Miller, and resided near Eaton-square, and resided
in Albany-street, Regent's-park, a few years ago. The
plaintiff's father is a tailor in Oxford-street, named
Upsdale. She first became acquainted with the plaintiff
and her sister Martha when they lived in Regent-street.
About three years ago they lived in Park-street, Re-
gent's-park. The plaintiff and her sister carried on
business distinct from their father, as milliners. She saw
the defendant once at the plaintiff's house in 1844. The
defendant then addressed the plaintiff as Miss Upsdale.
The plaintiff had a child, and the defendant saw it
frequently, and she had heard the defendant speak
to the child, calling it by the name of a nobleman.
In 1846 or 1847, she heard the defendant speaking
something to the plaintiff and her sister about a breach
of promise of marriage which appeared in the paper.
They were joking together on the sofa about it. In an-
swer to the defendant, Martha said it referred to her
sister, the plaintiff ; the defendant replied he knew it
did, though he asked ; but it would make no difference
to him as regarded their future happiness, and he would
love and protect the child as though it were his own,
and he wished it to remain at school until after the wed-
ding-day. The defendant said he knew that the child
belonged to a person named . The plaintiff and
defendant always appeared on terms of courtship, and
he was in the habit of addressing her as " Dear Ma-
tilda." In July, 1847, she saw a basket arrive from the
country, and heard the defendant say that the marriage
was to take place in September ; and be wished the
wedding bonnets to be produced. They were taken
out of the package and put on in defendant's pre-
sence. Witness had then got on the wedding
s swe
sa s
were
r he a vt en w
heo rsni
vaet
rt hger
ec3e,.r e m oTnnye.
bonnet, et ,
wedding which
dresses
defendant wished the plaintiff to advertise her property,
as her furniture would be of no use to him. The
plaintiff's furniture was worth 2501. to 3001. The de-
fendant wished the marriage to be kept quite secret, and
said it was time enough for his friends to know of it
when it appeared in the paper. The defendant also told
the plaintiff that his situation was worth about 2001. a
year. He also said that upon the marriage he would
put 1001. in his pocket, and the plaintiff would have her
choice of Dover or Paris for a wedding jaunt. He also
told the plaintiff that he could furnish a house which
would cost him 5001.; and that she was to keep one or
two servants, or more if she required it. The defendant
wished to be married at Old St. Pancras Church, be-
cause he had had a favourite sister married there to an
Irish clergyman. The plaintiff after this almost entirely
gave up her business.
Cross examined—The plaintiff, after the birth of the
little boy, took the name of Mrs. Black, and went, in
Camden-town, by that name. The plaintiff let out her
first floor to lodgers, and her servant went by the name
of Black. The servant knew her name was Upsdale.
The little boy was five years old. Mrs. Black would not
have accepted a man with only 801. a year, as it would
not have supported her as a lady, with a servant to wait
upon her.
Miss Martha Upsdale examined—She was the plain-
tiff's sister, and her father resided in Oxford-street. Her
father bad two daughters and five sons.
The plaintiff
was his eldest daughter and 28 years of age. The
plaintiff and herself lived at Camden.town about five
)ears ago. The defendant first visited the plaintiff
there about three years ago. The little boy went by the
name of "Charles Black," and called the plaintiff
"mamma." The child sometimes went by the surname
of a nobleman, and she had heard him so called in the
defendant's presence, and by the defendant himself.
Had heard the defendant speak of a breach of promise
of marriage, which he had read in the newspapers. He
asked witness whether it was herself or sister. Witness
told him it was her sister, the plaintiff. Defendant said
it would not make any difference to him, he should
respect her all the same, and always love and respect
the child. The defendant told her he knew that the
child was provided for. Remembered the order for the
wedding
vember. The defendant wished to be married the first
week in September; and he chose silver-grey for the
wedding dresses and inspected the wedding bonnets.
The business of plaintiff and witness, as milliners, was
worth from 3001. to 400/. a year when the defendant first
visited the plaintiff. They sometimes all used to dine
together on a Sunday with witness's father, who used
often to take them out in the phaeton She heard de-
fendant say his salary was 200/. a Ye
a
r
. for the
A number of letters.wsre now put indplaintiff,
addressed to her from the defendrt_......oiame,” antedd
ad
20th of March, 1847, was signed
to a d-
her as " M
dressed to Mrs. Black. It was addresseddnty
dearest Matilda," in which the defendant expressednnde, his
satisfaction at " again opening the
that my
?ow) isnene, and
in it wrote " Allow me to say
thahe first day o
we met."
sened. It is the same as it was t
in the
Other letters were put in, commencing in
June,
same.
contained
en-
dearing style. One, dated the 15t
have made up your
the following passage:—" As
you have
three
years' con-
mind at last to accept my band,
afterr
over as
sideration, we will have the mattue..
wish." soon
Outhaealswthe
can, although not so soon as I co
shall come, my dear
of July the defendant wrote:—"aney
that you are not in
little girl, on Sunday. I can f
and should like
ave nod temper, a , I
defendant went on to say
and knack it out of you.' Thetmen t
of 300/. or
that he expected soon a good appointment
4001. a year.
The last letter put in was as follows:
day A
, to. 8, 1847.
" Ely, Cambridgeshire,
Sun
obliged yugour note of
" Dear Matilda,—l am much
h
Friday last, which I should have replied to per return,
in business of
but have been so exceedingly engaged__
late that time only is excuse.
You expressed a de
it was I requiredof
sire in your last to know whatt you.
th•
Well, it is this :—After taking everyfather
emgin o conside-
ration, I think it is as well that yolF•ni hrtn. should be made
acquainted with all matters ; hi let
me,
bean , it by you ;
he can then, or you write too
much, a
ratherwill imme-
diately come up to town. I had it would
expect
be so for many reasons. I shortly
settledwill then good
appointment. As soon as that is then take
a house, furnish it, and have
heverything fit for your
Tere is only re-
ception for a lady to enter. y one thing I
require more—that on our marriage-day you be fur-
nished with 800/. or 1,000/. Ido.. not require it formyself,
the society
myself, but from _s.ell have to enter into
and other things it is required. You can now consider
my proposal, which I trust will meet with your views.
IF such be the case, I shall expect to hear from you in
the course of a few days, when, as before stated, I shall
meet your father with a feeling of great pleasure, and at
once. I hope to arrange matters amicably together. I
have only come to this decision, as I am sure it will
prove to be the means of our future happiness, and of
you, dear girl. Reconsider the matter if you will—l am
sure to agree with you in this one thing, that it is folly
to the extreme young people running away when they
are not possessed of an independent income. Were Iso
to do, none of my friends would look upon me again. It