The Sun.
London, England, 1834-07-21 00:00:00

Mr. SMITH conducted the prosecution ; Mr. STONE ap-
peared for the prisoner.
Samuel Mokes—l am a chimneysweeper at Witney. I
was in cempany with deceased at the Horse and Way on the
12th of. May last. He was playing at skittles with Lucas.
A quarrel ensued between them. The prisoner afterwards
camein. Lucas said to him, " this is the man I want you
to fight" (pointing to Townsend). The prisoner said to de-
ceased, " What have you got to say ?" Deceased said, " No-
thing." Then the prisoner struck deceased, who put his arms
round him, and they both fell down together. I said to prix
soner, " Don't you fight him no more, for he is not able to
fight you." Deceased was not well. They were not in liquor.
Prisoner then struck me. I said " Don't fight him any more ;
he shall fight you to-morrow morning for a sovereign if he is
better." John Stone said, " There's nothing like the pre-
sent time, go on." Then prisoner struck deceased on the
head, and knocked him down. Townsend was not doing
anything ; he said, " For God's sake don't strike me any
more, for lam not able to fight you." He was then on his
knees. Prisoner then struck him under the ear, and he
fell on his back, and closed his lips, and never spoke after.
William Lucas was.there. • The prisoner then went to see
another fight. I went also. When I returned, in about
an hour and a half, I found Townsend lying dead in the
brewhouse.

Cross-examined—Deceased was no relation of mine, but
we always called each other " brother." He was not a
prize-fighter. He had never fought but once before, to my
knowledge.
Several witnesses were examined, from whose evidence
it appeared that the prisoner had not intended any serious
injury to the deceased.

The Jury acquitted him of murder, but found him guilty
of manslaughter.
He was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment and
hard labour.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—NOTTINGHAM, JULY 18.
(Before Mr. Justice TAUNTON and a Common Jury.)
DENMAN V. TRUSWELL.
This was an action for a breach of promise of \marriage.
Mr. Bulguy and Mr. Clarke were counsel for the plain-
tiff, and Mr. Hill and Mr. Whitehurst for the defendant.
The plaintiff, Ann Denman, was the daughter of the late
James Denman, who had been a farmer at Farnsfield, in
this county. She and the defendant were cousins, and had
known each other from childhood. So far back as the
year 1822, an attachment had commenced between them,
and it was sanctioned by their friends on both sides. The
plaintiff was then about 17 years of age. In the following
year Mr. Denman died, but the defendant continued his
courtship of the plaintiff, who was a very handsome girl,
and with whom he entered into an engagement of marriage,
in consequence of which no other suitor was allowed to
approach her. One gentleman, however, did make some
advances to her, which had the effect of alarming the de-
fendant, who, in order to .assure the plaintiff of his deter-
mination to make her his wife, gave her a written engage-
ment in his own hand-writing. This paper would be given
in evidence, and contained a promise that he would make
her his wife, and no other. Mr. Denman died in 1823,
leaving no will ; and, in consequence, his property went to
his eldest son. The plaintiff, and the other ten children,
were of course left without" any property, and the family
thought it right to communicate this circumstance to the
defendant, he being under a promise of marriage ; the de-
fendant said his attachment was so sincere and deeply rooted,
that no change of circumstances would make the slightest
alteration in his intentions. They lived in the same vil-
lage, and he continued his visits year after year, till the
spring of 1833, when it was discovered that the plaintiff
was pregnant. The mother of the plaintiff, prior to this,
had frequently suggested that the time was wearing on, and
they were not married ; he replied, the longer he waited
as a bachelor the better, as he would be better able to pro-
vide for her. The defendant had taken advantage of the
confidence placed in him, and heartlessly and cruelly be-
trayed the plaintiff in an unguarded moment, and in the
spring of last year she became pregnant. Soon after this
discovery was made, instead of performing his promise, he
left her to shame and disgrace. Compensation in money
could not be awarded ; but in justice, a portion of the fund
he had saved ought to be given her to make her comfort-
able. He was possessed of a moiety of 100 acres of land,
and had been living a careful frugal life, saving money from
year to year, for the purpose of making a just settlement
upon this girl. The learned counsel concluded by calling
upon the jury to mark their opinion of the base and cruel
conduct of the defendant, by awarding ample damages.
Witnesses were then called who corroborated the learned
counsel's statement.
The written promise of the defendant was in these words—
" Dear Ann Denman,-_I mean to have you for my wife
and no other. This was wrot by my own handwriting.
" RICHARD TRUSWELL, Farnsfield.
" Nov. 30, 1822."
The plaintiff was brought to bed in the last year, and the
defendant said he would maintain the child.
jMr. HILL, for the defendant, urged upon the jury to do
ustice between the parties, and not to let their feelings bias
their decision in favour of the plaintiff, but to act according
to the oath they had taken. The real question at issue
ought to be looked at with firmness and coolness, and the
jury ought not to be drawn aside by an unfair representa-
tion : on the part of his friend, it was a matter of pounds,
shillings, and pence ; but on his view of the case, the
plaintiff was not entitled to any damages at all. That
which was called in her a misfortune, he should, in dis-
charging his duty, denominate an offence, committed as
much by the one as the other. What would be the conse-
quence upon the morals of;the country, if juries were to put
a value upon the commission of crime ? They were not
called upon to say how much they disapproved of the young
man's conduct, but they were to give the young woman
compensation for the wrong she had sustained, where she
was innocent, and without blame ; would it not be a fear-
ful prospect to hold out to persons in her condition if, in-
stead of encouraging them to habits of chastity, and guard-
ing against temptation, they were encouraged to become
tempters, and to inveigle parties into offences ? The learned
counsel then remarked upon the situation in life of both
parties ; that the property of the defendant had been more
than it was, and that was incumbered with 4001. for his
share of it ; that the paper containing the promise of mar-
riage did not give him an exalted idea of the plaintiff ; he
had looked fora stamp in the corner of this promissory note,
and expected to have seen it was for so many months, but
on examination he found it was a small square piece of
paper, and was a general promissory note, " wrote by my
own handwriting." He then remarked upon the " violence"
of the love between these parties, which must have been
closely bottled up, not to have escaped before thirteen years
had expired ; the dandling on for that period raised the
probability that, if on his part he intended to betray her, he
would not have waited till she was 28 or 29 years of age
before he had done so. If females could not at that
age guard themselves, it would perhaps be necessary to re-
turn to the Spanish system, and appoint a duenna over
them till they were fifty-eight, or perhaps sixty-eight years
of age. Supposing she was not equally guilty with the de-
fendant, an action might have been brought by her mother
for seduction, and then a jury would have seen what sort
of a person the plaintiff was, how the circumstances really
were, and whether the plaintiff was the poor, artless, simple
creature they had been led to understand. After a few
remarks upon the question of damages, he concluded by ad-
mitting that small damages must be given, but he prayed
the jury not to give anything excessive.
The Learned JUDGE shortly summed up, and the jury
retired for a quarter of an hour, when they returned a ver-
dict for the plaintiff—Damages 6001.
(Before Mr. Justice PARR. )
John Severn, aged 35, was charged with a capital assault
on the person f Jane Elizabeth Walkinson, a girl under the
age of 10 years.

In this case, the father and mother of the child being both
dead, Sarah Watton was called, but failed to prove her
under ten years, as laid in the indictment.
The Learned JUDGE told the jury that the prisoner must
be acquitted on that indictment, which was accordingly
done, and another having been framed, the grand jury found
a true bill for a misdemeanour.
He was subsequently tried on the latter indictment, but
the evidence is too gross for publication. The conduct of
the prosecutrix and the principal witness, a girl of 14 years
of age, called forth the animadversion of the Learned Judge.
Sveral witnesses gave the prisoner a good character.
The prisoner was found Guilty, and the Court, in pass-
ing sentence, observed, it was very glad that the weight of
punishment was discretional, although the wanton beha-
viour of the girls was no moral extenuation of the pri-
soner's guilt, which was a sad reproach to the good character
he had received from so many persons.—To be imprisoned
two calendar months, and kept to hard labour.
George Parker, aged 22, was indicted for a similar assault
was fired, whose lives were almost sure to have been sacri-
ficed, and it is a great mercy that their lives were spared.
It is my painful duty to tell you, that you have but a few
more days to live, and that by a sacrifice of your own life,
the example may induce others to abstain from the commis-
sion of crime. It seems you laid this crime to the account
of drink, when your conscience wrung from you the con-
fession you made ; but that is an idle delusion—it is not
drink that induces men to commit acts like these. For the
few days you have to live, I hope you will employ them in
such a manner as to reconcile you to your Maker, and hold