The Sun.
London, England, 1803-03-02 00:00:00

CORN EXCHANGE, MARCH Z.

Out late full Importations of Grain cause little
business this day ; there are souse fresh Wheat
samples from Essex and Kent, which sell nearly as
last day ; much Barley remains unsold ; Malt,
Pease, and Beans, go off heavily, and we see little
alteration in their prices, nor any in Oats I Flour
is also the same.,

rick Beans - _
his a 17$ a "
.2tis a 33s oi,
‘lVlthiceadtittu44s.a Ss°Bss aa
55;55 VI
Barley - 2oS a 2's 0;1 l'uland ditto -us a zts 6tl
Malt - . 'I 4os a 44s tiit ItapeSeed . ' - ,311 a 341
Rye .• -33 s a its al. Fine Fleur .. 43s A 47$ 0:1
White Pease , 333, a 395 oil' Scconddo .. 4os 3 43S
Beans . .31s a 36s od

No lees than . 218 'plants from the Torrid Zane
have lately been set in the BOTA'SIC Garden of
CAMBR IDG E.

Last Thursday a boy was taken up and commit,
ted to Maidstone gaol, charged with .robbing the
Mail, Which -he was entrusted to convey from the
above phsce Tunbridge, of a letter containing a
five pound Bank note, which he tendered for cash
to a person in that neigbourhood. It is worthy
of .remarL, that -the above boy, about three years
ago, when he was in a similar employment, charg-
ed a man with robbing, him of .th 4 mail, who was
tried for it, and on. his evidence alone convitled.
He- suffered bit Pennention Heath, and was after.
wards gibbetedin chains, where ,14' part or his skele.
ton Is still remaining. The unfortunate man, in
his last Blaileritfi Mat solttnnlr declArett his inpo-
ccoQC.,

rti;;' REPO RTA

COURT. OF KING's BENCH, MARCH tie,

SETTINGS 5ZY641.13110 ELItNNOROUC;I, IN GUILD..
HICLL, LW:DON.
Ma: Extitspza moved the Court, that Nicholas
Reddy .Ledwitch,.an Attorhey of the Court, might
be discharged out of the.custody of a ,'Serjeant at
'Mace, of The City of London, he having been taken
in Execution for a. Debt in his way home to his
Chambers, from Court, on Saturday, where he. had
been attending a cause in. which he was Attorney.
Lord ELLENBOROUtti observed; that from the
circumstances which were stated in the affidavits in
• this case, it was not improbable that an appliCation
should he made to the Court in Term ; all,he
~could do now, was to order that the Attorney
should be Immediately discharged; which his Lotd.
ship did. accordingly.

BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.

LEEDS vV. COOK AND WIFE.

This was an anion for a Breach of Prdmise of
Marriage-
Mr. ERSKIrm opened the case on the part of the
Plaintiff, who, he said, was a Gentleman of re-
spedability and station in life, residing in the
County of Essex.. His father and the father of the
Lady, who was the'subjeet of this action, were ex-
tremely intimate, and the two fimilies were con_
netted in friendship. This Lady was now the wife
of the Defendant, Mr. Cook. The Plaintiff' had
proposed marriage to this Lady, not only with her
own approbation, but also with the approbation of
her father. This proposition was a serious and well
considered one on the part of the parents and of the
Lady, herself ; not a transient aWeetion, taken up on
the sudden, and the sudden breach•-ot which was
matter of no great blame; such things not being
very uncommon in affairs of love, between persdns
who were very young; but a mature and deliberate
case of Promise of Marriage, on' the part of this'
Lady, and the breach of which had produced vary
serious inconvenience to the Plaintiff, as welt as great
mortification.

The Plaintiff was. possessed of 40001. 3 per Cent.
Annuities, and the Lady's father agreed Co give her
the same sum, and it was finally determined to enter •
into a marriage - settlement. The father of the
Lady being attached to. money, was 'desirous of
delaying. the execution of this marriage settlement
until after midsummer, in order to keep to himself
the dividend upon
_the stock ; but this being ac_
commodited to the wishes of the old ,Gentleman-,- by
the Plaintiff defraying all the expenees of the set.
dement, it was executed accordingly 'at the hotisse
of Mr. M. Thomas, the Plaintiff's Attorney, and
the licence was obtained and the ring knight, and,
the day fixt for the marriage ; but at an inst*it
when the solemnization of the marriag•.! was about
to be compleated, this Lady thought fit to elope to
Gretna Green with Mr. Cook, the present De.
lendant, whom she married, .and as this was a et-
dation of this Lady by the-Defendant, Mr. Cook,
he ought to answer for it in damages, for it could
nut be supposed this
.Lady would have thus eloped
with him, unless he had seduced her. The De.
fendanr, Mr. Cook had been long in the service'of
his Country, and was a gay and gallant
who had Otis taken away a Lady,'whose band and
heart had been-engaged to the against
whose cixiduel there • was no objection, nor was
there any thing to warrant this alienation in the
affection of this Lady, so that she must. have been.
seduced- to quit him.' In •support.of. the conduct
or the Plaintiff, he would read a letter from the
Lady herself. It Was dated Carlisle, t+th of May,
zSoa, direFted to William Leeds, Esq. 'Stratford,
St. Mary in Essex.-" Since my departure froth•
my father's house I have felt myself very
-uneasy inn
not making an apology for. my improper conduct,
towards you, - and amsensible of the injury ' off;:red
to you, in not performing the promise-made to.
you, but that promise was giVen without tonaider.-
ing what I was then doing, or thinking_ ivl)at
might be the consequences of it. lam well assured
of your attachment, for I must confess you always.
behaved well to me, and that yon are deserving pf.
one more worthy of your favour, and of makiiig
the marriage state-more happy to you
,than
my power to do. I never could have the. resolu-
tion to give you. a flat denial, although it is nut 'in
your power to give me that happiness which, I
hope from the Gentleman •I eloped with. 'There is
a secret something which forbids me to have for you
that love which a married couple ought to have for
each other, and as I know you to be a Gentlemln,
I trust you will' not take. advantage of this,,ar:d.l
pray the blessing of God to make you enjoy happi.
ness, &c. Eiiz. EasKiNR observed
upon the difference between a breach of promise,of
marriage made by a Gentle Man to a Lady, and that
of the female sex •ro a Gentleman, the one being,'
much more grievous than the other ; but Ladies
were not to he excused for these levities, they
were bound by their contrails as well as Gentle.;
men, and here her husband was answerable for this
breach of promise. He did not --call for any. yin.
dietive damages, but he did. ask of the Justice of the.
Jury that sort of compensation which a grave Case
like this called for, because it was not a light thing
to be thus treated, nor was a Gentleman to endure
this inconvenience and mortification for nothing,

It then appeared in evidence, as Mr, East; INE
opened, that ,the Plaintiff paid his• addresses to the
Lady, Miss Cardinal, by her father's consent, and
that the marriage wAs agreed on, that the Settle.
went Was aaually executed, the licence obtained,
411 d the sing purchased, and that the day was axed
fot the solemnization of the marriage, and then she
went suddenly away with the Defendant, who is.
Ptirser of an Extra East Indianian. After iv.hich
Mrs. Cook sent to the Plaintiff another letter,
dated. the z4.th of May, stating---“ Dear Sir, I
have taken the liberty of writing to you, that I
shall take it a great favour if; you -will take an
opportunity of corning to my father's to-morrow
Morning, for I wish to tell you the reason of .my
going away, which was sprite unexpeded, tk.c. ; for
I never did desire to behave dishonotirable to yOu ;
the thought snakes me very. unhappy, 8,4 c„,,
Mr., GARROW, on the p4rt of the Defendant,
made an able speech, in the course of which, he
obtstved there were two i,topciirions to 'be o'4tt•

Milted, And one event- 6ii ght disptiO 4
theth, yet they-Cart dis-tin6.l-proposititins What
this Defendant ought to pay ? and what flePlaiii.
tiff deserved id have. 'Now, supposing the Plaid.;
tiff to have condnaed himself pdtle.c.ctly well; per:.
the Defendant ought td pay a considerable
sum, because - the running away with a Lady thtis
engaged, would,: in that case, be a
,eery improper
as but if- ihe.Plaihtiff,had miseonduaed himself,
then the qUestion was not:to be decided by consider..
ing what the Defendant ought to pay, 'but What
this Plaintiff ought to receive ; and upon this vied
of the matter he liaid no difficulty in, saying its
confidently ape&ed, that the Jury, after a Nil,
hearing of this Case, would:mirk their gtnse of it
with a verdia of one farthing ; for he shOtijd,proyc.,
that- after the martiage-settlement was eicecutedi
the Plaintiff treated -.this Lady with. the 1-.104c
brutal violence, saying that he would
and break every bone,m.her. skin, and that icier,
they were married: he would murder her ; that
threw his whip at her itta Ariolent)passion, and
,he
said they, were not married yet ; that while he ;:ti as
at the house of Mr:. Cardinal& the Lady',-;
(where he 'had lived for two years tlti thiS),,
he proposed id a woman of the, tiatOf 'Of Hart, the
wife'ef Mr. Cardinal's liailiX.--tt—c,pnunit adnitrit
with her, saying that Ate had better have Ewa
fathers for het childt.-.4 She told hini tOgal
to Miss Cardinei whom he was4Aing to wed,' He
said. thatMila Carditiar might be danreO. 'rifts
ryasbet ween the loth oft April and the jch of May„.
Tbttt within three days afrer. Miss Cardinal.eloPeO,
with Mr. Cook, to worn she is now married, thi,J
Plaintiff aanally made ptopOsalS of marriage to Miss
,ki
Turpin, a young Lady in .the neigWyn+.o.. ;-
wrote to her a letter off ring to settle on her the '
interest of zoool,' a-year ; not was this all, for' he
should prove that on theevening Of the very day"
on which ihe marriage settlement was exteuted, •
this very Plaintiff spent his evening with his in-:
tended father:in-I:4w in London, zinc% in going- to
their quarters,. Which were at the Bltie Boar, in
Whitdchapel,- the Plaintiff-picked up a woMah
the town, and went .with her to her lodgingS ict
Milk street, and afterwrili boasiect of it: to -his
intehded father-In.law, who then remonstrated, with;
him, and said, he kneW not how he. might “fl7=ethiS,,,',
health, arc.; that when' the Plaintiff was told this
young Lady 114 eloped, he said, " Good riddance'
of bad rubbish f" .So that When this'Wis'establimbed,r
it would appear an infamous case on the part of the-
Plaintiff; and the Jury Wotild find a verdict for the
lowest denoMbiatioriof coin in this

'lt''appeated then by the evidence of. John' Car-
dinal, • the Lady's Brother, that the Plaintiff had'
threatened her to break her bones, &c. and threw'
his whip at her, &c. anti by the evidence of Sophia.
Burnley, .h servant, 'that he threatened to kill'her
and by the evidence of John Hart, that the' Plaintiff
sent a letter to; Miss Turpin, offering her marriage,
within three,days after the elopeMent of Miss Car
(final; and Miss Turpin co.lfirmed this by her evi-
dence, and at whose.hon4 the Plaintiff now, hoards
and lodges;. • • • '
It appeared alats,..by the evidence of Satah Harr;;
that he proposed to'eommit adultery with het, say.e.
ins, she had betteeleave tWtfathers than one : that-
.he did not care a damn fdr Miss Cardinal ~'ande•
above all, that he. spent the evening With his 'Psi.
tended father-in-law, and adually piL'ked op a
into of the town in the street; and went with her
to her lodgings, in Milk-street ; and 'afterWatils,;
came to. his intended father-inria, and bo4ted Of.
it, whereupon the old than, Mr. Cardinal, rermin.
strated with 111:n.1)1 100 his Miscontikl; an&then the
old4narainformed his ,daughter of it. in one, wordi.
every truiterial4aCi stated by Mr. Gartiaov.,; WAS
proved; . •
Mr. Easterivt, ,far the Plaintiff, cOntended, that
the wholc,of•this catse7tnade.out for the Defendant,
arose cult of a firnily conspiracy to rob. the Plaintiar
of ,his-fair fame and reputation, . and dial no credit,
.was:due,,to the- tcsvimony .of. the: witneues Inc the.
Defendant : 'that this was a very serious cause, and,
descried' verfserous treatment, and that the dam
mages, although he admitted they ought nor to be
outrageous, yet ought to he serious. .
Lord EI.LRI4BOROUH delivered Vey :able'
Chary to the Jury, and observed, that' thii was ara
.aCtion brought against the Defendant, IVir-COalep°
for the supposed mistianduft of his 'wife ; anti 'sup, '
posing her miscOnduseCto be proved to the satisfaBi,..l
of the Jury, Me Defehdant was liable to answer
for -it in damages. This aaian wits 'founded On a
breach of promise of Marriage, 'a sreeies orsitit
which %sins capable of a greater' vartety.Of 'shades
'and-diversity of complexion th:rn-almat:t.ariy olher4
The first point Was; Whether this breach of Jiro.
mist was under..eiteurnaianeeti 4wlhch tendEred it
venial or excusable.? anti if nor, what damages
,
shonld be given to the Plaintiff-;'_ There inightlse
a 'case where a man might come before the -Jurya:.
complaining dl'aiSerious injury done to hint by as
breach of promiseanade.by,a woman to marry hirer,,,
In all these cases, the condtgl; of the patty coma,
plainhag-was.as much to be considerettas the person:
against wham the 'complaint was made, and .that
especially as it referred to the feelingi of the party
because feeling constituted a part of rite loss coma:
plained of. His Lordihip then sutnnted tap the whole
of the 'evidence .most .cortedly, and riOtte. -just.
obseriminne on it as he proceeded. As to the,
letter of the Defendant's wife, by which she
announced the breaking off of the contraet, his
Lordship observed, it did not contain any ceimplaint
against the Plaintiff for any of that harsh treatment
which bad been given in -evidence, and therefore
she had precluded herself from justifying the breach
of her promise, in point of law, however prudcat
it Might have been iu point of lA, and therefore,
avail events, the Plaintiff was entitled to a .verdict.
What damages he should have was far the, Jury to
consider, and that depended upon the faOs as they
were sworn to on built sides. His Lordship had
no difficulty In saying that, with a little allowance
for mistakes, he believed all the evidence given its
this cause; for there were no parts of it that
;vete inconsistent with the reit. By the part of
it which appeare'd, there .was about all the par.
ties- before the Court, a coarseness of taste, and
roughness of manners, that evinced a very dafedive
education. ..But if the Jury believed the evidence
given on behalf of the Defendant, the case would
autiount only tcl nominal damages. If they ditibc,..

r
i

lievtd the eyidepte
.{fit' the tletendAnt, the care
would then be aivery aggravated- one, frpm the na-
ture' of the defence ;' but the whole of it was with
them, and no doubt it would be' disposed Ofiustly.
Verdid for the Plaintitt—DamaeSOneShillint.