The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-06 00:00:00

. _ . .
;n I that the marriage to Collard took place on the 22
:f June, 1847, at St. James's Westminster.
.0
Mr. COOKE made an ingenious and feeling address t
fhe jury, contending that it was doubtful whether she
knew her first husband was living at the titn6 she mar-
ried Hinckley. Then the fact of the three husbands
staying at one house, end seeking, as it would appear, to
4et her banished from the country, showed, ihat with all
her faults, she was more sinned against than sinning,
and he confidently asked for a verdict of not guilty.
The prisoner was Acquitted, and no evidence 9ffered
by the prosecution on the other two indictments.
NISI PRIUS CONRT.
(Before Mr. Justice PATTESON and a Special Jury.)
BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE—PHILIPS V. CHARLES.
In this case Mr. Sergeant Taltourd, with Mr. Godson,
Q.C., and Mr. Cooke were for the plaintiff; and Mr.
Whately, Q.C.. represented the defendant.
This was an action for breach of promise of marriage.
' The plaintiff was a lady of 43, the sister of a merchant
at Cardigan; and the defendant, who was 46, was an
attorney in that town. They had known each other for
nearly twenty years. What was remarkable in the case
was, that after the wedding-dresses, cards, and cakes had
been prepared, the breakfast ordered, the day fixed, and
a wedding.party invited, the defendant, without any
pre-vioui intimation of his change of intention, married
an invalid old woman of seventy, just two days before
the day fixed for his marriage with the plaintiff.
Mrs. Margaret Gwyer was the wife of a commission
agent, at Bristol, and the sister of the plaintiff. The
plaintiff kept house herself at Cardigan, and her brother.
who was a matster, lived with her. Was at Cardigan in
August last. The defendant called at plaintiff's house
at seven in the evening of Thursday, the sth of August.
There was a pie-nic party the next day on Cardigan-
bar. A Mr. Al• Cord and the defendant went before the
party to make arrangements. Saw the plaintiff and the
defendant together there. They walked about together,
and came up to near where I was. I heard Mr. Charles
say, he hoped I would not place any obstacle in the way
of his marriage with my sister. I replied, " I
never dictated to her in my life, but have always
looked to her for advice." He made no remark, but he
wished the marriage to take place immediately—on the
following Tuesday. My sister said, " No, I will take
time to consider it." Ho did nut become pressing. _ I
do not recollect anything further. I then separated for
a short time from them. We met again at dinner.
After dinner the plaintiff and defendant walked away
together, and again came together to tea. After tea
the defendant joined me and renewed the subject, and
expressed a wish that the marriage should take place on
the Tuesday. He talked of his property, said he was
worth 9,0001., and would settle his landed property on
Mary, and his personal property too, if she wished it.
I said she would no doubt be satisfied with any arrange-
ment he might make. I was the first to name the place
where the marriage should be solemnized. My sister
wished to have one of her sisters to be present at the
wedding. Elizabeth Jordan is her other sister. Mr.
Charles said he had not the slightest objection to go
anywhere. After that we went home. On the next
day, Saturday, I saw him about one o'clock, at my sis-
ter's house. He said he called to apologise, and hoped he
had not offended her the day before. I said she was
not very well pleased, but I would go for her. That
phrase referred to his having been excited the day be-
fore. He had been excited after the dinner, just as we
were leaving. I went for her, and brought her to him,
and he then expressed his sorrow. He generally called
her Mary. I went away, leaving them together. They
remained together for half an hour. Before I left I saw
him trying a ring on her finger. He came again the
same evening. Mr. M'Cord came with him. He still
wished the marriage to take place immediately. He
said it was useless to spend longer time in courtship.
My sister said she was not prepared—she was in mourn-
ing—she would take time to consider—and would never
marry until she could do so as it suitediher station in
life. It was then arranged to postpone it, and that she
should come to Bristol. I was to go the marriage trip
with them to Paris. They remained together some
hours that evening. My sister came to Bristol on the
Ist of September, and resided at Clifton with my sister,
Mrs. Jordan. The 16th of September was named for
the marriage. Dresses, cards, and cake were ordered
and prepared. Bridemaids were spoken to, a wedding
breakfast was prepared. Mr. Charles was expected in
Bristol on Tuesday the 14th. Called on Wednesday on
my sister. He had not arrived, and she could not ac-
count for his absence. After it was clear on the Wed-
nesday that he would not come, the breakfast was coun-
termanded, and the guests were apprised of it. My
sister was deeply depressed, and felt insulted, and her
health appeared to suffer. The cards were ordered
and printed. •
Cross-examined.—My father was a spirit merchant.
Spirits could be bad at his shop in small quantities.
After his death my sister kept the shop ter a year, or •
year and a half. She also let lodgings, and continues to
do so up to the present time. Mr:M•Cord keeps a spirit
shop at Cardigan. My father was also a shipowner.
He had shares in several coasting vessels. He was not
a fisherman in early life. The picnic had been fixed •
week before the sth of August. It was on that evening
the defendant was invited to join it. After the pic.nio
there was some brandy elrantr. The defendant did not
become so drunk that he was brought home in a donkey-
cart. He rode home part of •the•way in a donkey cart.
I left the next day. The defendant lodged at Miss
Williams's for some years. I have not seen her for 20
years. When last I saw her she was far advanced in
years. My sister told me that Miss Williams sent her a
message that the defendant could not marry her while
she (Miss Williams) lived. Mies Williams was the lady
the defendant had since married, *Mr. Charles gay) ref
sister.6ol. to buy weddine favours.
Re-examined.—The 30/. was expended in the purchase
of wedding favours. After defendant, in returning from
the pic-nic, had ridden for a short distance in the don-
key-cart, he walked home with me. The bar was threat
miles from our house.
Mr."ffenry Brown Jordan (the brother-in-law of the
plaintiff), proved that the marriage was arranged to take
place at his house, and that the breakfast was ordered.
On the 14th witness and the plaintiff went to the Curs'
Berland-dock to meet the defeudant, who was expected
by the Swansea packet. .On the next day he was ex'
pected by the mail, but on his not appearing the break'
fast was countermanded. On the Thursday morning a
letter came from, witness's brother-in-law, Mr. Philips,
stating that the defendant had been married to Mist/
Williams. Plaintiff seemed, to feel acutely the defers'
dant's conduct, and suffered severely. She was deeidedif
distressed.
Cross-examined—l went .by her direction that verf
morning to an.attorney's office and the next day a writ
was issued.
Mrs. Elizabeth Jordan, the wife of the last witneser
proved that she was present when a letter from the de'
tendant, dated the sth of September, 1847, in an save'
lope, addressed to Mr. Jordan, was received.
The letter was read, it commenced thus:—" My dear
Maria,—ln answer to
.your kind favour, which relieved
my mind of some anxiety, we had a storm here 101
Tuesday." This singular opening created some laughtoe
in court. . The letter then went on to describe the stored
and the casualties arising out of it, and then to request
a few lines "to know if our plans are altered; if not,
shall start by the mail this day-week for Swansea, and
thence on Thursday by the packet to Bristol, and oft
Thursday week I hope to be happy-for ever. Cardigan
has been very fiat since you left. ' In.' the mean timer
after dinner, I studyto be steady and domestic. I smoke
one cigar every evening in my small garden to white
away the time. The old maids begin to think that )ea
have given me the slip,_ es there is not a word said about
our getting married.. Mr. Morgan..invited. me to spend
the Sunday at his house, and offered to take me in hie
chaise, but I declined, as you did not seem inclined to
like my going. Mr: Lucas called but did not nonee our
affair. • Mr. Nugent•calls almost every day, generally in
his usual state. lie has no encouragement from me,
Drinking in the mottling is ungentlerainly and die'
graceful. .
Elizabeth Bradford, a dresanieker,- at Bristol, proved
that.she made.the. wedding dresses; and
.when about •
month after the time fixed for the marriage she at"
tempted to fit en one of them .aha.lound Miss Philips_
very greatly depressed in spirits, and considerably
thinner. •

The Rev. J. Thomas' the clergyman of Cardigan,
knew the plaintiff and defendant formany years. She
was a regular communicant. On the 13th of September
the defendant applied for a license to marry Miss Wil-
liams; on which the witness said, he was very much
astonished at the application, as he understood he won
to be married. to Alias Philips, and desired him to re"
collect what he had. said in the.week about his intention
to marry Miss Philips, .and told.. him it was a &erica:"
thing to say the week before that he meant another
person, and asked him, did he feel comfortable?
He
said he had quite altered his mind and would marry
Mrs. Williams. That he had lodged with her for
29 yearq. The witness added, I told him he had '0
solemn oath to make before my granting the license,
and I handed to him the printed form of oath and the
license. He carefully and deliberately read both over
I said, " Mr. Charles, you will see, on leading these,
whether your way is quite clear." He was married
the next day, the 14th et September.—(His bride w5l
called by the witnesses Mrs. and Miss Williams indir
criminately).
Cross-examined—Have known Mrs. Williams for
years. She was brought into church to be married i 0
a sedan chair 'up to the steps of the communion.table•
She cannot walk in her own room without crutches.
She appears to be about seventy. She has been for
years an invalid. She had been a sort of mother to My
Charles. We frequently called her his mother.
Re-examined—Did Mrs. Williams' infirmities ineresee
or diminish your surprise that he should so insult the,
plaintiff? Witness—l cannot say, as lam not a medics+
man.
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. WUATELY having addressed the jury in mitigir
Lion of damages,
His LORDSUIP summed up, and the jury, after a few
moments' deliberation, returned a verdict for the plain'
tiff—Damages, 1,0004
The Court was engaged the rest of the day with 00
action of replevin, to try a right of common.

Bln, RTS.
On the 31st xlt., at Milto PeH
terborough, the Viscounteaa
Milton, of a :roc
On the 25th ult., at Larnaca, Cyprus, the lady of Nivea
Kerr, Esq.; of a eon. • •

• DIED.
On the 19th ult.,• at Corfu, Geraldine Frances D'Aquilarr
th.:-wife of George-Bradford Ellicombe, Esq.
On •the 25th ult., at Lambeth; Clements Vincent, third sell
of the late Anthony Bertolacci, Esq., aged 39.
On the 30th ult., at Harbottle Castle, Northumberland,
Thomas Clennell. Esq., eldest son of the late Thomas Fell'
wick, Esq., aged 82.

a 4
London: Printed and Published bT MUBDO,'TOLNG.
No: 112, 'Strand,' Printer, at The Sun OfZfe, •Nix
Strant-in -the Precinct of the Savoy,-iti the' dimity
Bilddlesez, Thuraday, April 6, IE4B.