The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-22 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
ROME ClRCUlT.—Maidstcne, March 21.

CIVILSIDE.—(Before Lord Chief Justice WILDE and

a Special Jury.)

BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.-EXTRAORDINARY

CASE.-ADAMS U. GIBES.

This was an action brought—byJ.ne Emma Adams
against Richard Gibbs, to recover damages for the breach
of his promise to marry her.
The defendant, in addition to the usual formal pleas
denying the making of the promise, &c., also pleaded
that the plaintiff had not required him to perform it; and
he had also caused to be placed upon the record two
other pleas of a very extraordinary character, in one of
which he alleged that after making the promise to the
plaintiff be had ascertained that she was suffering from
an incurable disease called consumption, and was on
that account unable to perform the duties of a wife; and
in the other he stated, that he was required to assign
over certain property, to which, through his wife, be
would have been entitled, to other persons, and on these
grounds he alleged that he was justified in refusing to
perform the promise be had mad..
The damages a e:e laid at 2,000 L
Mr. M. Chambers and Mr. Bovill were for the plain-
tiff; Sergeant ShEe and Mr. Ogle appeared fur the de-
fendant.

Mr. CHAMBERS, in o; ening the case, said that it was
his duty, on t'-te part of the plaintiff, to lay before the
jury the extraordinary circumstances under which 'she
was obliged appeal to their justice far com[ensation
for the deep and di•tressing injury which she had re-
ceived at the hands of the defendant; and, when he had
laid before theirs the singular circumstances of the
transactior, he was satisfied they would see that the
case was one which required their most serious consi-
deration, and which demanded very heavy damages in-
deed at their hands. The plaintiff, Miss Jane Emma
Adams, was the eldest surviving daughter of a gentle.
mar. residing at Wateringbury, in this county. He had
formerly carried on the business of a farmer, at Nettle-
stead, very extensively, but he was unfortunate, and, in
consequence of the circumstances of this case, be felt it
necessary to give the jury some information with regard
to the condition in life of the father of the plaintiff. It
appeared that, being in difficulties, and indebted in a
considerable amount to his wife's relations, he had
agreed to give up his farm to his brother-in-law, and
his relatives consented to pay the whole of his debts, he
undertaking, on his part to give all the se-
curity in his power for the repayment. The
defendant was a farmer and hop-grower in the same
neighbourhood, and he and his family were on
the most intimate terms with the plaintiff and her
relations, and constantly visited them, and he therefore
had ample opportunity of observing the conduct of the
young lady and also the state of her health before he
made the promise of marriage, upon which this action
was founded. At the time the offer of marriage was
made the young lady was about 24 y ears of age, and the
defendant was about 45, and it appeared that in August,
1848, ho first made the proposal to the young lady. She,
very properly, immediately communicated what had
taken place to her faller, and he subsequently had an
interview with the defendant, and upon that occasion he
called to his attention the disparity between their ages;
but the defendant made no difficulty of this circumstance,
and the plaintiff's father then said that if they theta-
selves saw no difficulty in this respect, ho should net,
upon the ground of their differences of ages, offer any
opposition to the union. He at the same time told the
defendant that he was aware of his circumstances, and
that he was not in a condition to give his daughter any
fortune, and the defendant replied that he did not desire
money, and that he had plenty to support his wife, and
that all he desired was to be united to his daughter.
From this period the defendant was received as
the acknowledged suitor of the young lady, and be pro-
ceeded to purchase new furniture, and to make altera-
tions in his house, in anticipation c f the marriage, and
at length the wedding
was appointed to take place on
the 16th December, at the church of St. Martin's-in-the-
Fields, and a short time before the day in question the
defendant, who intended to have the marriage solem-
nized under a special licence, went to London in order to
comply with the necessary form of residing a certain
period within the district where the ceremony was to be
performed. He had stated that Miss Adams was en-
titled to a small amount of property at the death of her
mother, and it became necessary that certain deeds
should be executed before the marriage took place, and
the defendant, who was informed of the whole of the
circumstances, consented to be a party, and it was ar-
ranged that ho should be present at the office of the
solicitor, in Maidstone, when the deeds were executed,
and Thursday, the 14th of December, was appointed for
that purpore. The plaintiff and her father, and the other
persons interested, accordingly assembled, but tho defen-
dant never made his appearance, and nothing more was
heard of him from the month of December, 1848, till
October, 1849, when he again made his appearance in
London. Of course great alarm was felt by his friends,
and also by the plaintiff's family at his absence. It was
imagined that some accident must have befallen him, and
the police were applied to to make inquiries respecting
him, but for a long time no information whatever could
be obtained respecting him. It was at length ascer-
tained that on the day when be was to have attended to
see the deeds executed at Maidstone, he had gone as far
as Reigate by the South-Eastern Railway, and that he
left the train at that station, and proceeded to make his
way to Liverpool, to which place some notes, which he
had received for stock he had sold, were traced, and

it was supposed that he had gone to America; but,
however, nothing was heard of him, neither was any
letter or communications in any state received
by his own family or that of the plaintiff, and
nothing Ras known respecting him, until the month
of October, 1849, when it appeared that ho was disco-
vered in London. The jury might very well conceive
that this proceeding occasioned the most dreadful alarm
and anxiety to the plaintiff, and for some time it was
found that her mind was affected, and that she would
never reco‘er the shock she had sustained. Owing,
however, to the constant attention of her brother, who
was in the me Heal profession, and the kindness sho bad
received, not only from her own relations, but also from
the family of the defendant, that fi ar did not now
exist, but her constitution and health were impaired,
and she still suffered most deeply from the conduct of
the defendant. The defendant had never condescended
to give any exp'anation of his proceedings, and he was
really at a loss to imagine what answer was to be
attempted on the present occasion. With regard
to the pleas that had been put upon the record,
several of them were merely of a personal character, but
as to the last two pleae, hemust say that he looked upon
them as an aggravation of the defendant's misconduct,
and but that he did not believe they exanatcd from him,
but were merely placed there by his attorneys, he should
have no hesitation in att)ing that it was most disgraceful
to attempt to make such a defence. The Learned Coun-
sel then proceeded to state that it appeared to him that
these pleas were most odious and distressing. The de-
fendant by one of these pleas did not deny that he had
made the promise to marry the plaintiff,
but he asserted
that she was suffering under a deadly disease, and on
that account she had no right to ask him to fulfil it.
What were the circumstances under which the defendant
had dared to place such
a plea upon the record as an
excuse fur his own misconduct? He should show
that he bad been on intimate terms with the family—
that be was constantly visiting at their house,
and if there was any foundation fur the as-
sertion with regard to the state of health of the plain-
tiff, Le must have been aware of it, or at all events,
ought to have been, before he took upon himself to
make her an offer of marriage. He was instructed,
however, that there was no pretence to the allegation,
and he defied his. Learned Friend to produce any testi-
mony to confirm that which was stated in the p!ea, viz.,
that the plaintiff was suffering under consumption, and
if he did not do so, he thought the jury would agree
with him that the placing such a plea upon the record
was an additional insult to the young lady, whom he had
rade already
some
soe
observations
oLtebaerrnpelde2C,osutantsierlkg
that then
it was equally incapable of proof, and he concluded by
asking the jury whether, it he should make out these
facts to their satisfaction, they would net consider that
the amount of damages claimed in the declaration were
only a sufficient comkensation fur the injury the plaintiff
had sustained.

Witnesses were then examined in
ment of counsel. proof of the state.

Sergeant SUEE then addressed the jury for the de-
fendant. Ile commenced by observing, that the de-
fendant never intended in any way to cast the slightest
slur upon the virtue, reputatien, or conduct of the plain-
tiff or her family, and he was now instructed publicly
to make the admission, and at the same time also to
state, that there was nothing whatever in the circum-
stances or conduct of the father of the plaintiff, which
cast the slightest discredit upon him, and that he would
have been proud to ally himself with the family, but for
the reason stated in that plea with regard to the state of
health of the plaintiff, and which was the real and sub-
stantial defence he was instructed to make upon the pre-
apt occasion. There was a very great difference in the
circumstances of cases of this description. If it ap-
peared that a man under the plea of affection and the
promise of marriage had seduced an innocent girl, and
then cast her off an object of scorn to the world, or
that he deserted the pretended object of his affeciion
for another who was more wealthy or more beau-
tiful, in such cases juries very properly gave large
damages
; but he would confidently ask the jury
whether the present was not a case of a very different
description. The defence he bad to urge upon the jury
was, that the defendant was not actuated by any im-
proper motive, but that he really loved this young wo-
man, and had the intention to make her his wife, until
he had reason to believe that the state ef her health was
such as to render it almost certain that their union would
be a most unhappy one, and that the offspring which
would be the result of it would in all probability be
'
doomed to a premature grave. The Learned Counsel
then remarked upon the dreadful extent to which the
disease of consumpti m prevailed in this country, and
he asked the jury a heilier, if the defendaut really be-
lieved that the woman to whom he was about to be al-
lied was tainted with that discrler, and rcflected upon
the melancholy consequences that were likely to ensue,
whether he was not morally justified, and whether be
did more than pe farm his duty in refusing to effect
such an union. It was clear from the evidence
that the promise in question was hastily made, and
that on:y a week before no ic'ea was entertained
of it being the intention of the defendant to
make an offer of marriage to the young lady, and be
should submit to the jury that up t this period the de-
fendant had not had the opportunity of asceitlining the
condition of health of his intended wife, He would, in
the first instance, ask them whether, upon the evidence
that had ID( en laid before them, they entertained any
doubt that the young lady was in reality labouring under
this dreadful disease. They had hoard that two of her
sisters, one aged 20 and the other 22, had been snatched
away by it; that her brother had been sent to India in
the hope that it would preserve his life from also falling
a sacrifice to the disorder; and, although one medical