The Sun.
London, England, 1861-08-16 00:00:00

BRITISH FISHERIES.

The annual report of the commissioners for the
British fisheries notices the growing tendency to
open the continental markets to the herring trade
by a eduction of import duties. Hitherto the trade
has been chiefly with Prussia and the Baltic ports,
but France has already in the new commercial
treaty greatly reduced her duties, though probably
not enough yet to aliow a thriving trade to be
pushed in that quarter. Negotiations are also on
toot with Austria, where a very large business could
he done, profitably to both nations, it Austria could
be induced to relax her tariff. The British herring
fishing of 1860 yielded more thani an average catch,t
and a large proportion-681,193 b_lrrels—was
cured. The brand, though there is now a fee upon
it, is as much in request and estimation as ever, and
231,913 barrels were branded last year, 377 970
barrels were exported, 291,401 to the continent.
The returns for cod and ling show rather smaller
quantities cured and exported than in the preced-
ing year. The herring, cod, and ling fisheries em-
ployed 12,721 boats, manned by 42,430 fishermen
and boys, and the boats and nets and lines engaged
were of the estimated value of £750,196. The admi-
nistration of the fishery convention with France
was, as usual, attended last year with difficulty,
owing to the encroachments of French fishermen
within the three-mile boundary; but the French
naval officers sent in cruisers to watch over their
own fishermen were always ready to promote the
impartial investigation by the magistrates of
Charges of infraction of the convention, and M. de
Fouillioy, -p
rench naval commandant, gave very
cordial assistance to effect the adjustment of such
cases. The Lords of the Admiralty intend to apply
a stronger force in tuture, and thus remove the
allurement of an unprotected boundary, which
brings on so many encroachments and quarrels
gmons the fishermen,

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE,

HOME CIRCUIT--CROYDON, Aug. 15.

(Before Mr. Justice Blackburn and a Common Jury.)

MIDDLETON V. DRAGE.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff,
Emily Middleton, against the defendant. Edmund
Drage, to recover damages for the breach of his
promise to marry her, and the damages were laid at
£5OO. The defendant pleaded that he did not make
the promise alleged in the declaration.
Sergeant Shee and Mr. Woollett were for the
plaintiff; Mr. Denman, Q.C., and Mr. Needham,
were for the defendant.

Sergeant Shee, in opening the case to the jury,
said the plaintiff was a young woman 24 years of
age, who resided with her mother at Lynn, in Nor-
folk, and although they were not wealthy, the
family were in a respectable position, her father
having been an architect and surveyor, and upon
his death, which took place in the year 1852, the
plaintiff resided with her mother, and if his. instruc-
tions were correct, the defendant had been guilty
of a most heartless act of seduction towards her
under a solemn promise of marriage. The defendant
was about 3.5 years of age, and resided at a place
called East Rudham, a few miles from Lynn, and he
farmed land at that place,carried on the business of a
corn dealer, and from his establishment, and the way
in which he lived, exhibited all the appearance of a
man of property. The defendant and the plaintiff, it
appeared, had first met at a bazaar that was held at
Lynn, about two years ago, and he continued to pay
attention to the plaintiff wherever he met her, and
about the month of Feb., 1859, he was introduced
to her mother, and very shortly after that time it
appeared that he announced his intention to marry
her, and was received upon that footing in the
family. The circumstances of the family did not
admit of their keeping a servant, and shortly after
the introduction of the defendant to the mother of
the plaintiff, it appeared that she left home upon a
visit to a relation, the plaintiff remaining at home in
charge of the house. The defendant was in the habit
of paying constant visits, and upon one occasion
while ' the mother was absent upon this visit, he
went into the plaintiff's bedroom and succeeded in
obtaining possession of her person. After this had
taken place the defendant gradually absented him-
self from the house, and although the plaintiff
wrote no less than 20 letters to him imploring him
to keep the solemn promise he had made to her, he
did not condescend to reply to any of them, and it
was not until several months afterwards that the
mother was informed of the painful position in
which her daughter was placed. She then, it ap-
peared, wrote to the defendant, entreating him to
keep his promise, but to this letter he also sent no
reply, and the mother of the plain tiff then sought an
interview with the defendant and asked him whe-
ther he intended to marry her daughter, and also
why he had not answered her letters. In reply to
the laet question the defendant said it was no busi-
ness of hers, and to the other he said he had been
informed that the plaintiff nad miscon ducted herself
with other men, and he should have nothing more
to do with her. The learned sergeant said that
under these circumstances the plaintiff had no alter-
native but to bring the present action,and he observed
that, although the defendant had ventured to in-
sinuate to the mother that her daughter's character
was not pure, he had not dared to put a plea to that
effect upon the record as an answer to the action,
and he called upon the jury to give the plaintiff
exemplary damages for the injury she had sustained
at his hands.

Mrs. Elizabeth Middleton, the mother of the
plaintiff, was then examined. She stated that she
and her family had resided at Lynn for many, Tears,
and her husband had carried on the business of an
architect and surveyor at that place. He died in
1852, and after that time the plaintiff continued to
reside with her. The defendant resided at East
Rudham, about 16 miles from Lynn, and he described
himself as a farmer and merchant, and he was in
the habit of coming to market at Lynn every Tues-
day. In February, 1859, she was walking in the
town with her daughter, and they met the defendant
and he spoke to her daughter, and on the same day
she brought him to the house and introduced him to
her, and said that he was the gentleman they had
seen so frequently bowing to her. The defendant
stayed a short time, and when he left he promised to
come on the following Monday and take her daugh-
ter for a ride. After this the defendant paid them
constant visits, and upon one occasion witness heard
him say to her daughter, " Never mind my friends.
They cannot choose a wife for me ; if I was as rich as
a Jew, and you had not a penny in the world, I
would have you for my wife.' Witness heard the
defendant say that he should not make any presents
to her daughter, because he thought it was not right
for any man to do so to a woman when he intended to
make her his wife, and that he wished her to take him
fn. himself alone. After she had been on a visit to
her sister the defendant ceased to visit at her house,
and her daughter, in consequence, appeared very
unhappy ; but she did not know all that had taken
place until several months afterwards, when the
plaintiff informed her of the conduct of the defendant
and said that she had written twenty letters to him
and he had not answered one of them. Upon receiv-
ing this information she wrote to the defendant, en-
treating him to do justice to her daughter, and to
keep the promise he had made, but he sent her no
reply. In September last she determined to see the
defendant, and found him at an inn in Lynn, and
she asked him why he had not answered her daugh-
ter's letters ? He replied that this was no business
of hers, and upon her asking him whether or not
he intended to marry her daughter, he said he
would not take notice of any girl who took notice
of other men. Witness asked him what he meant
by this statement, and the defendant replied, " She
knows." Witness was very angry with him at this,
and said she would take that cloak of religion off
him if possible.

Serjeant Shee—l believe the defendant did always
profess to be very religions, and used to talk about
the solemnity of marriage.
Witness—Yes, he always professed to be a very
religious man, and said that he and his family en-
tertained very high church principles, and that he
was in the habit of expounding the Scriptures to
the boys in his parish once a week. (A laugh.)
The witness added that she told the defendant at
the same interview that she was determined to ap
peal to the law if she could do so.
Cross-examined—The first time she saw the de-
fendant at her house was in 1859, but she had
heard before that that he had been in the habit of
paying her daughter attention when he met her, and
he used to leave any company he was with to go
up to her and shake hands whenever he met her,
Matthew Middleton, the brother of the plaintiff,
proved that upon one occasion, after the defendant
had been introduced to the family in. February,
1850, they were smoking a pipe together, when the
defendant said to him, "I suppose you know upon
what terms lam come here upon ?" Witness told
him he did not know, but he had an idea, and he
should know when he told him. The defendant
then said, " I have been seeking your sister a length
of time, and we have agreed to be married as soon
as the arrangements can be made ;" and witness
replied that he was glad of it, and hoped they
would be happy.
This was the plaintiff's case.

Serjeant Shee then briefly, and in most eloquent
terms, summed up the evidence, and said that it was
clear that the defendant was unable to adduce one
tittle of evidence to support the insinuation he had
made against the character of the plaintiff, and there
was not the slighest doubt that he had been guilty
of a most heartless act of seduction, which called for
exemplary damages.
Mr. Denman then made a most able address to the
jury for the defendant. He said that as the law at
present stood in regard to cases of this description,
there was this anomaly, that a plaintiff or defendant
could not be examined to show the jury under what
circumstances the promise was made, and he could
not therefore place the defendant before them to give
his version of the transaction. He then proceeded
to remark upon the slight evidence there was that
any promise had been given, or as to the position
of the defendant, and he asked the jury for both
these reasons not to give any more than a moderate
amount of damages.
Mr. Justice Blackburn, in summing up, observed
upon the absence of any information being afforded
on either side whether or not a child had been born.
Sergeant Shee said it would be admitted that no
child was born.

The learned judge then proceeded with his sum-
ming up, and said that he hoped the jury would
take this and all the other circumstances of the case
into their consideration, and give such an amount
of damages as they considered reasonable.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—
damages £250.

..........•••••••••

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—LIvERrooL, Aug. 15.
CHARGE AGAINST A MATE OF SHOOTING A SEAMAN.
At the Liverpool assizes yesterday, William
Crosby, 25, and Matthew Gibney, 32, were arraigned,
the former for shooting a coloured seaman, named
Henry Johnson, on board the ship Panama, on
the 16th May last, and the latter for concealing
and harbouring Crosby after he had committed
the offence. At the time mentioned the vessel
was lying in the Mersey prepared to sail for
.San
Francisco. The prisoner Crosby was the mate of the
Panama, and the prosecutor was one of a number
of coloured seamen who had shipped at Liverpool
on board the Panama. It appeared that some dis-
putes had arisen between the black men and the
officers of the ship, and the former having com-
plained that the provisions wereunfit for food, they
were ordered by the officers to leaNte the ship: The
tmen declared their willioresa to do sot but 113.81 gi-

ed on going below first to collect their clothes.
Some white seamen having in the meantime arrived
alongside, the blaek men were peremptorily re-
quired to get into the boat. 3, the officers telling
them that their clothes would be sent after them.
As the men resisted this order an encounter took
place; and while the prosecutor was lowering him-
self into one of the boats, and was suspended by
one hand which grasped a rope, the prisoner shot
him with a pistol. Johnson loosed his hold im-
mediately and fell into the water, but was imme-
diately rescued and conveyed on shore. The
defence was that the complaints as to the provision-
ing of the ship were groundless; that the black
sailors outnumbered the whites; that their conduct
was very violent, and that from their being armed
with knives the prisoner was led to extreme
measures in self-defence. The refusal to allow the
men to take away their clothes arose, it was con-
tended, from the fact that the coloured men had
each received £5 in advance on going on board, and
that the detention of the luggage was merely a
device to secure at least part of that money.
The prisoner Crosby was found guilty of unlawful
wounding, and was sentenced to one month's im-
prisonment.
The other was discharged.
THE ROYAL EXCHANGE INSURANCE FORGERIES.

Edward Williamson (late agent in Manchester of
the Royal Exchange Insurance Company) was
arraigned at the Liverpool assizes yesterday upon
four indictments charging him with defrauding
that company of very large sums of money by means
of forged documents representing fictitious claims.
He appeared much dejected, and in a low and
almost inaudible voice pleaded guilty to all the
indictments.
Sentence deferred.

SPURTING INTELLIGENCE.