The Sun.
London, England, 1859-11-15 00:00:00

tent purpose. He took her there three years fol-
lowing. He took her to Warwick races, but I don't
think he took her to church. I afterwards spoke to
him of marriage, and he said in the close of 1858 he
should be his own master, and then he would marry
her. He kept sporting dogs and horses—he called
one of the dogs and one of the horses "Lotty" after
her. (Laughter.)
Mr. Tindal Atkinson—That he might always
have " Lotty" by him ? (Laughter.)
Witness—Yes. I know he is married to Miss
Hargraves. My daughter spoke to him about
Miss HargraveS, and he said he had only written
to her out of friendship, and that he would let her
see the letter, but I don't think he did. He
used to visit three or four times a day. One
fair day I asked him what was the matter
between them. He said he did not like petti-
coat government, and would never submit to
it (laughter), but he loved Charlotte, and would
marry her. When my daughter was in London he
cailf.d, and I told him I had received a letter from
her, and that she desired me to give her love to him.
He said he had also received a letter from her that
morning. He then said he should marry her in
November. On ne occasion she was working some
collars ; he asked her to let him mark them. She
consented, and he asked What they were. She said
C. N. He said, " Let me mark H." She said
" No ; wait till the proper time .
*arrives ; it will be
time enough then." He said it mi;
h
done then, as it would not be long beforte7that wellt be
time
arrived. He also wished to have some plate of hers
marked with his initials; but she declined. He has
a well-stocked farm.

Cross-examined by Mr. Edwin James—They
went to school together, and were very friendly.
After the father's death he lived with his mother.
I did not visit her. We were on speaking terms.
He used to come to the Bear. My daughter assisted
me in the business. I first spoke to him of mar-
riage in November, 1856. At that time he must
have been about twenty-one years of age. I men-
tioned the marriage to him frequently. My daugh-
ter did not visit at his mother's. %Ve lived about
a mile apart. I knew my daughter corresponded
with him. I recollect the valentine with the lock
of hair coming. She kept the hair for a long time,
but I believe she afterwards lost it.

Mr. James—That is considered unlucky. (Laugh.

ter.)
Witness—l believe it is in some things. (Re-
newed laughter.) I believe at ono time there were
a few words between them, but I don't think it was
of any consequence. 1 don't remember her writing
him that his absence would be acceptable to her.
Miss King, of the White Hart, went with the de-
fendant and my daughter to Warwick races. De-
fendant has a sister married. We did not associate
with the family—we did with his aunt.
By Mr. Atkinson—When I kept the Bear lie
came on market days and met other farmers. It is
the practice for the farmers to meet on market days
and settle accounts. _ _

Mr. Charles Gore deposed—l live opposite the
plaintiff's house. I have seen defendant visit there.
I have met him there, and I presumed hb visited
Miss Charlotte Newman. He had addressed
her rather familiarly, such as " Lotty, ow are
you?"
Miss Hemmings deposed—l am defendant's aunt.
I have known the plaintiff's family about three
years. I have been a neighbour of theirs for that
time, and on friendly terms, occasionally visiting
them. I know my nephew has visited the plain-
tiff. He has been two or three times with her at
my house, and spent one evening there with her.
I do not know of any presents being made by him
to her of my own knowledge. I have heard so, but
he did not tell me of it. I never saw them walking
about the town together. Ido not know anything
of the defendant's circumstances. I am an annuitant
from his late father's estate. He has never said
anything to me about his circumstances.
Cross-examined by Mr. E. James—l am his late
father's sister. The plaintiff never ♦isited the de-
fendant's mother. The plaintiff has spoken to me
about him. She never said to me she could not
bring him to the point about marriage. She never
said anything to me about marriage, neither have I
heard anything about it.
Mr. Mace deposed—l am related by marriage to
the defendant. lam a farmer, residing near Sher-
borne, in Dorsetshire. I am one of the trustees of
the defendant's father. I produce the will. He
takes £2,500 under the will, with a reversion after
his mother's death of perhaps £2,000 more. He
had nothing at 21 years of age. His farm is well
stocked and in good condition.
Cross-examined by Mr. E. James—The £2,500
is in farming stock. He had no money. That is
reserved for paying the annuities with which the
estate is charged.
By Mr. Atkinson—The will is sworn under
£12,000. The debts seduced it to £9,000.
No witnesses were called for the defence.
Mr. T. Atkinson then addressed the jury on the
facts of the case.

Mr. Edwin James having addressed the jury
for the defendant in a powerful and humorous
speech,
The jury retired, and after an absence of half an
hour returned into court with a verdict for the
plaintiff—damages, £2OO.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.
(Before the Chief Commissioier.)
BETTING IN BRIDE-LANE--IN THE MATTER OF
EDWARD DAVIES. .
This insolvent, described as occasionally " bet-
ting on the turf," who was in prison, was opposed
by Mr. Sargood on the part of a person named
Thomas Newcome, who was stated to be a " better
on the turf."
Mr. Dowse supported the application for dis-
charge.
In May last the insolvent laid a bet of .E 7 to .£l4O
with Newsome at his " place of business," as it was
termed, in Bride-lane, on Defender for the Chester
Cup. The bet was made on the day the horse was
to run. Defender was "scratched" on the day of
the race, and on the next day the insolvent applied
to Newcome to return his money, which he refused
—and on a second refusal on the asme day an assault
took place by the insolvent for which Newcome
brought an action in the Court of Exchequer, lay-
ing the damages at £2OO. The jury awarded £3O
as damages, and the costs had been taxed at £5O
4s. 6d., and for both sums the insolvent had been
taken in execution at the suit of Newcome, who
now opposed his application for discharge.
The question now raised in order to bring the
case within the act of Parliament (Ist and 2d Vic.,
c. 110) was, that the assault was of a "malicious"
character. It appeared from the evidence of New-
come that the insolvent asked him for the money
as the horse was " scratched" at the time he made
the bet. He told him he could not attend to him
then, and he went away. In about an hour he re-
turned, when Neweome told him that he did not
officially know when the horse was scratched, and
*he was then felled to the ground by the insolvent,
as seen by several persons. When he came to his
senses he was in the Punch Tavern, and the land-
lady, Mrs. Bowie, was washing the blood from his
face. He stated that the bet was made with him
about twelve o'clock, and the race was run
about half past three o'clock. He received the
" tissue" of the scratching when he was at the
Punch Tavern having -his dinner. According to
custom, a bet made on a horse scratched on the same
day as the race took place was not to be returned,
=1 when he made the bet with the insolvent he
did not know the horse had been "scratched." He
was very much injured, and obliged to have medical
advice.

On cross-examination, a good deal was asked
about Bride-lane. Newcome said there used to be
a good many persons meeting there, but only a few
now ; they had all gone to Hyde-park. (A laugh.)
Mr. Dowse said the police had made it very un-
comfortable for the sporting gentlemen, who were
obliged to "move on."
Dr. Owen Evans described the injuries Newcome
had received. He was very much knocked about,
and he had to attend him about three weeks. The
charge was 15 or 16 guineas.
From the insolvent's examination it appeared
that in 1858 the insolvent came from India, where
he had sold some horses, having been to Australia.
He received about £6OO, and had about £4OO when
he came to England in August,lBsB. He had very
little left in May last. He asked Newcome for £7
back, as the horse was scratched two hours before
he made the bet. It was usual to return money
under such circumstances, and he had seen money
returned. He said Newcome had aggravated him
by putting up his eye-glass when he asked for his
money, and by lifting up his hand to push him
away. He also stated that he arrived at the trial
too late, and the case was nearly over when he got
into court.
Mr. Sargood submitted that the evidence proved
the assault to have been " malicious," and therefore
prayed for a judgment.
Mr. Dowse contended that the insolvent was en-
titled to the money, as he belies ed, and the refusal
had irritated him, on which he struck the blow.
The Chief Commissioner said no witnesses had
been called, exept the parties themselves, to show
who was entitled to the money. There had been
an outrageous assault, and it was ridiculous to sup-
pose that a man, because he refused to return a
sum of Money, was to be knocked about in the
manner described. The insolvent must either pay
in purse or person, and he would allow an adjourn-
ment to compromise.
The insolvent said he had no money. Newcome
had had about £2OO or £3OO of him since he came
to England.
The learned Commissioner told the insolvent he