The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-18 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—.Nottingham, March 16. 1
.M
The Right Hon. Mr. Baron Parke having yester- 1
day afternoon, as before stated, disposed of much of
the town business, took his seat on the civil side of
the hall at nine o'clock this morning.
Lord C.lmpbell presided in the Crown Court.
Time calendar, as already mentioned, as to the enor-
mity of the offences charged, is heavy.
The cause list was light, and disposed cf by an
early hour in the afternoon by the Learned Baron
(Parke). It comprised seven cases, of which one,
"Curtis and Another v. Cartwright," was undefended,
and two " Wylde v. Boot," and " Holland v. Thur.
nan," came before special juries. In the former of the
special jury causes a verdict was taken by consent for
500/., nothing publicly transpiring about it ; whilst in
the latter, an action on the case for the alleged in-
fringement of a patent, both parties being patentees,
each appearing to have a tendency towards pacifica-
tion and quietude, and a rooted conviction that "a
still tongue maketh a wise head," the validity of the
plaintiff's patent was admitted, and a juror with-
drawn.

Mr. Hayes and Mr. Mellor were the counsel fur the
plaintiff; and Mr. Whitehurst, Q.C., and Mr. Hum-
frey, Q.C., for the defendant.
DOE, ON THE DEMISE OF BURTON AND WIFE AND

OTHERS, V. AILEY, CLERK, AND ANOTHER.
This was an action of ejection brought by the co- '
heiresses-at-law of one Anne Christiana Watkinson,
who had married the Rev. John Simeon Hiley, against
the reverend gentleman, the widower. The property
is situate at Birmingham. The reverend defendant
proved a valid ante-nuptial settlement, conveying the
property to him for life, with certain remainders over
and ultimate remainder to the reverend defendant in
fee,.which (it was insinuated) " was the highest es-
tate known to the law," as, according to an ancient
writer, who adopted the metrical form of expounding
this rather dry legal axiom :
"He who hath lands in fee
Need never shake nor shiver,
Because as how, d'yo see,
They're his and his heirs for hiver."
Upon proof of this, the plaintiffs, through their
Learned Counsel, elected to be nonsuited, Mr. Hum-
frey, Q C., Mr. Macaulay, Q.C., and M. Flowers re-
presenting them ; and Mr. Whitehurst, Q C., and
Mr. Balguy, jun., the reverend defendants.
In " Darford and another -v. Erlam," and "Same v.
Wright," both actions on promises, verdicts were
taken for the plaintiffs, upon certain terms, nothing to
mention transpiring. Mr. Iluuifrey, QC.' and Mr.
Mellor appeared for the plaintiffs ; and Mr. White-
burst, Q C., and Mr. Miller fur the defendants.
The only remaining case was that of a broach of
promise of marriage, which was an inquiry to assess
damages, the defendant having suffered judgment by
default.. A " special summons " had been had
recourse to.
ELIZA LATCOCK V. NEALE.-BREACH OF PROMISE OF
MARRIAGE.

The declaration averred the promise of the defend-
ant to marry the plaintiff, and the defendant had not
pleaded at all. Mr. litamfrey, Q.C., and Mr. Will-
more, with-much grace, represented the fair plaintiff.
Mr. Macaulay, Q.C., on the other hand, had the mis-
fortune to represent the recusant young gentleman
proceeded against, as a warning to all others, in like
manner disposed to offend, not to make to all young
ladies rash promises founded on transient youthful
impulses, and affections not sufficiently matured or
deeply rooted.
The case presented but one remarkable feature of
interest, which was the laissez aller mode in which
the engagement was by the defendant broken off.
Extracts were read from numerous letters from the
defendant to the plaintiff, beginning with one (No.
4), dated the 18th of April, 1845, and ending with
one (No. 16:3), dated in the month of November,
1349, which, without any other evidence, amounted
to most ample proof of the promise, if such had been
necessary, but which, indeed, was admitted on the
record. There was not in the letters anything ludi-
crous or silly, or otherwise interesting to the minds

of persons of either high or 14)w' good, depraved, or
meidocre taste. They were the letters of a sensible
man, committed by a promise to be afterwards very
deeply deplored, and handsomely paid for. Certainly
there was nothing in the letters to induce any right-
minded person unnecessarily to cause a more extended
publication of them than has been already recorded,
written as they had been, in sincerity and confidence,
with fair regard to an honestly contemplated com-
pact, the most sacred, as it is the most itnportant,
that man or woman either in this life can enter upon.
Thus may the letters which, with the exception of the
brother Henry's testimony, may be said to have been
all the evidence adduced on the part of the plaintiff,
be shortly disposed of.
The plaintiff's father was a respectable tradesman at
Sheffield, with a goodly family of ten daughters to
provide for. The defendant was described as a land
valuer. In 1843, he, then very young, and a pupil of
Mr. Bright, an eminent surveyor in that great mer-
cantile town, at the time residing in the house of that
gentleman, became introduced to Mr. Henry Lay-
cock, the brother of the plaintiff, and through him to
his sister and family ; so the intimacy with the
plaintiff commenced. Since that time a son of Mr.
Bright had married a sister of the plaintiff. After the
engagement had been firmed, the defendant, as a
land surveyor, went into the county of Norfolk to
manage the affairs of Sir R. Sutton ; but a difference
having arisen between him and another person in the
employ of Sir Richard, with whom that Learned
Baronet took side, or for some other cause, the de-
fendant left Norfolk and came again to reside at
Sheffield, for a considerable space of time dwelling in
Mr. Laycock's house. He again left Sheffield, and
appeared to have thrived beyond his expectations in
his profession of a surveyor and land valuer. One
day he met the brother of the plaintiff, and to him
',Try coolly said, "Oh ! I cannot marry your sitter."
fhe brother, etonne quite, asked, "Why not ?" and
Le only answered, "Oh ! I do not love her well
enough."
Mr. IIIiCAULAY, Q.C., addressed the jury in miti-

gation of damages, and did not omit to remark upon
the possibly rather important fact that selected pas-
sages only had been read from selected letters only,
whilst not one had been read entire, or a single letter
from the lady been presented to notice. We under-
stood the learned counsel to more than hint that a
gentleman took a wiser and more honourable course
by acting as the defendant had done, and acquiescing
quietly in the verdict that must be given against
him, than by going to the sacred altar with a lie in
his mouth, and with holy ceremony, before God,
perfecting a contract from which he involuntarily re-
coiled, to the foreseen and contemplated perpetual
misery of himself and the lady, of whom in his early
youth, with judgment unformed, he had become
enanmoured. Far was he from being instructed to
east any reflection upon the lady. The defendant had
in this instance avoided the irrevocable tie for life to
3itterness within sight. By the record, and through
nim, his learned counsel, he had admitted his faulti-
ness in point of law, and was now ready to pay the
sum wherein he might be amerced by the finding of
the jury for this, his first and only youthful indis-
cretion.

It is not unworthy of a passing remark, that,
though it did not publicly in court transpire, on an
early day in this very week there appeared in The
Sun a report of a case (tried on another circuit) in
'which one of the nine sisters of the plaintiff had
brought a like action (fr breach of promise of rnar-
riag) and been awarded damages to the extent of
4001. Here, though Mr. Humfrey's pathos not at all
fell short, the jury, having for some time retired, gave
only five-eighths of the sum obtained by the wore
fortunate sister previously, who, as we are given to
understand, was older, so that one has for the failure
4001. (minus costs between attorney and client, not
allowed as between party and party), and the present
lady (with like deduction), 2501.
Tee civil business of these assizes being thus
concluded,
Mr. Baron PARKE sat on to try the remaining
town prisoners, and concluded his judicial labours
-for this county at
.seven o'clock. Be will, how_
ever, sit to try county prisoners at nine o'clock on
Monday ; to which hour he ordered the court to be
-adjourned,
No case of any importance occurred.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Lord CAMPBELL.)
Three cases only were disposed of in this court to-
day..

George Doson, 32, was acquitted upol an indict-
inNat charging him with burglariously breaking and
entering into the dwelling-house of Robert Walker,
on the 15th December last, at Sheiford, with intent
to commit a felony.
At five o'clock the grand jury returned into court
with all the remaining bills, and presented the sub-
joined memorial to the much revered late Lord Chief
Justice

"TO TIM RIGHT HON. TUB LORD DENMAN, &C.
"My Lord,--The grand jury and magistrates at-
tending the assizes for tha county of Nottingham
respectfully desire to convey to your Lordship their
feeling of sincere regret for the cause which has pre-
y nted your again presiding at their assizes.
" Remembering the long connexion of this county
with your professional career, and the satLfaction
• experienced by its magistrates in particular, and by
at the elevation of one they
its inhabitants in general,
-, had so long known and esteemed to the highest seat
of Criminal judicature in this realm, and highly sp.
preciating the inflexible integrity, the honest inde-
pendence, the freedom from all prejudice which have
marked your discharge of that high office, they deeply
lament the loss which the country at large sustains
by your retirement, and desire to express their earnest
hope that a long period of improved health may still
enable you to discharge the important functions at-
.tacked to your -elevated rank, and to enjoy with un-
alloyed satisfaction the reminiscence of arduous duties
faithfully performed during a long and agitated
period."