The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-18 00:00:00

SUMMER ASSIZES.

HOME ClRCUlT—C7ielmsford, July 17.
(Before Mr. Baron GURNEY and a Common Jury,

BREACH OF PROMISE or MARRIAGE.-SPAULL V. FOSTER

This was an action brought by Mary Anne Spaull to
recover damages front Stephen. Foster, for a breach of
promise of marriage. The defendant pleaded that he
did not promise in the form alleged in the declaration.
Mr. Platt, with Mr. Itussell Gurney, were for the
plaintiff. Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. Gray appeared
for the defendant.

Mr. PLArr stated the case, and said the plaintiff sought
compensation or damag cs from the defendant, for hav•
lag in a most cruel ma nner outraged her feelings, by
having made a solemn promise to marry her. The
Learned Counsel proceeded to observe, that the plaintiff
was a young lady co': education and great respectability,
and at the time she first became acquainted with the de-
fendant resided with her aunt, who kept a boarding-
school at Witham in. this county, and she was engaged
in that establishment by her aunt to teach the pupils
French, music, and other accomplishments, in which
she was a proficient. In the course of the year
1841 the plaintiff and the defendant met toge-
ther at the place of worship they attended,
and he shortly after: ards expressed an affection for her.
and eventually called upon her aunt, and requested that
be might be allowed to visit the plaintiff as a suitor ;
and as he and his connections were known to be respect-
able, no difficulty was felt upon the subject, and he con-
tinued to visit her as an acknowledged suitor until Oc-
tober in the following year, when he addressed to her
the following letter.

" Oct. 1, 1842. •
"Dear Miss--Fn explanation of yours to-day, I must
say that I have made up my mind to discontinue my
visits; as I find it, all things considered, impracticable for
me to be united, therefore I felt eeluctant to inform you
of my alteration of mind.—l remain your sincere well-
wisher.
"P.S.—I have no unkind feelings, I can assure you,
towards yourself."
It appeared that after this, in consequnce of corn-
inunications that took place with the defendant, he
resumed the intercourse with the plaintiff, and their in-
timacy continued as before. He always expressed the
greatest affection for the plaintiff, and repeatedly expressed
his intention to marry her. She was introduced to hie
familyennd treated by them as his affianced wife, and
repeatedly went to his father's house. The defendant
about this time occupied a farm at I'iptree, and it was
expec'ed that the marriage would speedily take place,
and indeed things went on so far that the wedding-
dresses were actually purchased. The defendant, how-
ever, it would seem, again changed his mind, and in
January, 1844, he wrote a letter to the plaintiff', which
led to the psesent action. Only very shortly before it
appeared that all his epistles breathed nothing but love
and affection towards the plaintiff; and then, without
assigning any reason for -such a proceeding, he again
took upon himself to break off the connexion, and the
plaintiff was now compelled to resort to the present pro-
ceeding to obtain the only reparation allowed her by
law. The Learned Counsel then read the various letters
that were afterwards produced in evidence, and said that
the latter ones were of a most in ulting and ridiculous
character, the defendant writing, as he chose to ex-
press it, "by heads," as saving time, and being
by far the quickest mode of 'correspondence.
The Learned Counsel then proceeded to state
that the plaintiff challenged every inquiry, and defied
the defendant to give any valid reason for his conduct,
and, indeed, he had not ventured to give any, but had
merely pleaded that he did not make the promise.
That he did so, however, would be saisfactorily proved,
and the other facts would, likewise, be made out, the
letters of the defendant himself clearly shoaing the
nature of his connection with the plaintiff; and as to the
refusal to keep his engagement, he apprehended there
could be very little doubt upon that point when the cor-
reeponderre was laid before the jury. If he made out
the case, as he had no doubt he should be able to do, the
next question was, what amount of damages the plaintiff
was entiled to for the cruel treatment she had received.
She had been led to expect to be united with the man
she loved, and to have obtained a settlement for life ;
but, without any ground, all her hopes had been de-
stroyed, her affections trifled with, and she had been
deserted by the man on whom she had placed all her
reliance ; and, if ever there was a case calling for
exemplary damages, he submitted to the jury it was
such a one as the present.
Mrs. Sarah Spaull, the plaintiff's aunt, was then exa-
mined—She proved that she resided at Witham with her
niece in 1811, and she spoke to the defendant, having
called upon her, and asked permission to visit her niece
as a suitor, and, on her consenting, he continued to do so,
with the knowledge orhis friends, and the plaintiff and
the defendant appeared to he sincerely attached to each
other. They corresponded with each other, and the
plaintif visited the defendant's father and his family, and
was received by them as the intended wife of the defen-
dant. The witness deteed the course of the intimacy
between the parties down to the month of January,
1843, and identified the letters produced as the hand-
writing of the defendant. She also said that . after the
period she had mentioned, the defendant called upon
her, and wished the plaintiff to accept of a sum of 2001
that his father had offered to her, in order that she might
go into the country and recruit her heath.
The following letters were then read. The first was
written soon alter the defendant had renewed his inti-
macy with Miss Spaull. It was dated December 9, 1842,
and its contents were.as follow :
"My dear Mary Anne,—l had intended to have come
down to Witham, and had the pleasure of seeing you,
but as I have had something of the cold chills for a day
or two, I think it will not be wise. To remedy this,
we hope to have the pleasure of seeing you at Tothem
(his father's residence) to tea. The governor says that
you must stay the night and also to-morrew night as
well, if possible. Would it be troubling you too much
to bring some of your music and a certain letter that
you have in your possession? Please inform the bearer
what time your ladyship will be at the White Hart. I
have now great p!ea titre in being your ardent and de-
voted lover, " STEPHEN."
Another letter, dated November 30, 1843, was to the
following effect :
" My dearest Lore,— I received your pretty little note
this morning, for which I feel extremely obliged. I was
out, certainly, y. sterday. just down to the bank and back
again immediately, while the sun was at full, and, on
horseback; did not perceive' myself any worse. I should
have called, but did not stop anywhere. With fondest
affection. your devoted lover, " STEPHEN."
" My very dear Mary Anne,—Having a spare mo-
ment cm my hands this morning, I thought I could not
employ it with more pleasure to myself than con-
versing with you by my pen. Really, without yeur pre•
Bence, everything appears dull and dreary to me. I long
to see you, but I feel it would not be prudent at present
to venture out in an evening, neither would you wish
me, I know. I have lately thought more highly of you
than ever, longing for the time when we shall spend
many happy days together. Every day endears you to
my affections, as I have your person in my mind, with
your tender looks and pleasant smiles ; in fact, every
object appears lovely where your presence is. I must
confess I never felt what I do now before. This last
visit appears to have quite won my heart over with more
than ardent affection. Terms are all too insignificant
to describe to you my feelings—words would fail ; but
I hope, when I see you, to give you some faint idea
of what my feelings are. I wish you were at
Tothem. My dearest girl, you would fancy lam draw-
ing up en exaggerated statement, but I can assure you
candidly it is rot. I know :that when I express my sen-
timents on this point fully you sometimes deem it flat-
tery, but I can vouch for these being my calm. collected.
and candid idess. Would •it not be my pleasure to
constantly please were it in my power, when you are
connected by that endearing tie which -1 hope will not
soon be dissolved, but as years advance be firmer and
stronger, if possible. Now, then, my dearest love, you
wilt say I have trespassed too long on your time. I
must conclude, hoping to rsceive an epistle from you,
promising me in it you will have no one else. I feel
anxious now about your going to Loudon. Don't fall in
love w ith any one else, dear.— Your more than ever
attached and devoted lover, " STEPHEN.
" 1,000 kisses, dear."
The next letter was dated Jan. 2, 1844. It was as
follows :
"Dearest hove,—lst. I must apelogise fur not writing
before; 2d. I thank you for your letter; 3d. I have no
time; 4th. I hope you are still well; sth. I am glad you
are enjoying yourself; 6:h. I cannot come to town, I am
so busy.—Yours, very truly, " STEPHEN."
The next letter had no date, but the post-mark was
Jan. 3, 1844 :—" Mary Anne,—First, you complain of
my plan of writing, which has greatly annoyed me ;
second, it is strange forme to be dictated to, by one
so much my junior ; third, I hope if you see any one
at the wedding that suits, you won't let the opportunity
slip. but em'orare it ; fourth. I need not define, but you
will take the full meaning of this last particular ; five,
I wooed advise you to seep with your m )thsr—you
are happy you sac ; six, I know you will be mere
happy than at Witham, as it must be many years before
you can alter y•our situation.
" Yours, very respectfully,
This is not a hasty conclusion."
he witness was then cross-examined by Sergeant
snr.E—Witness kept a boarding-school at Witham, and
the p lintitl taught English, French, and music to the
pupile. Believed the intimacy first took place between
the plait tiff' and defendant at a rehearsal of music at
the chap& at Witham. The plaintiff used to play the
seraphi:.e at the chapel, as there was no organ.
Arrangensents had been made for the wedding at
the time the defendant broke off the intimacy
with Miss Spaull. She did not recollect having heard the
defendant say that his ci:euinstancets were such as to
rendee it improper for him to marry. She was sure that
the stim of 200/_ was mentioned by the defendant, and
he did not say that his father was to give it. He said
that he had no fault to find with her, but he could not
marry her. He did not add the word " then." After
this he defendant frequently seat to inquire after the
s Eliza Atkinson, a boarder at Mrs. Spaull's,
spok to the visits of the defendant to the plaintiff; as
her suitor. She remembered when the match was bro-
ken 03-', in December or January last, and after the
plaineiof had received the defendant's letter, she returned
bo-ne very ill, and and appeared to suffer so much that
witness was frightened to Se;e,.hor, She continued very
ill for-so ne time, and appeared to.auffer great distress of
mina.
By Mr. Sergeant S El: —The plaintiff said she had
seen the defendant, and they had had some disagree-
ment about a letter he sent to her. Thinks she also told

Mr. Baron GURNEY then summed up, and the jury
retired. They were absent about a quarter of an hour.
when they returned into Court, finding a verdict for the
plaintiff: Damages—Four Hundred Pounds.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron PARRE.)
Wm. Saxby, a little urchin, nine years old, was in-
dicted for feloniously setting fire to a barn, the property
of John Kempson, at Ramsey.
Mr. Wordsworth conducted the prosecutim, and Mr.
T. Chambers appeared for the prisoner.
From the evidence adduced it appeared that the fire
took place on the 6th of June, and it was clearly proved
that the prisoner had caused the mischief. When he
was apprehended by the inspector of police, he admitted
that he had put a lighted lucifer mater into the rick,

and set it on fire. —lt appeared that property to the
amount of nearly 4,0001. was destroyed.
Mr. CiuMBF:RS. for the prisoner, urged that the act
was' ne of a childish mind, unaware of the consequences.
and that the prisoner ought not to be convicted of
felony. •
Mr. Baron PARKE having snipmecl up, the jury
found the prisoner Guilty, but recommended him strongly
to mercy.

The Learned JUDGE said the recommendation should
be attended to, and he respited the judgment.
Henry Herbert, 52, was indicted for a felonious assault
upon hip own datmhter, a child 14 years old.
Mr. Marqh conducted the prosecution.
The details of the case are quite unfit for publicatior,
but they exhibited the most diseusting profligacy on the
part of the prisoner, the evidence leaving very little
doubt that his brutal proceedings had originally com-
menced while his (laughter was under ten years of age.
The jury found the prisoner guilty of the misdemea-

n"ur only, and he was sentenced to be kept to hard
labour for two years.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.--liOxford, July 16.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Chief Justice TINDAL.)
Richard Elliott was indicted for stealing a banker's parcel,
containing 1,500 sovereigns, from the Defiance coach, on the
18th of March last.
Mr. Keating appeared on the part of the Crown ; Mr. Bal-
lantyne and Mr. Huddleston defended the prisoner.
As the circumstances of this case have excited considerable
attention, we furnish the evidence somewhat more than
usually in detail, as elicited from the different witnesses.
Mr. Robert Hare (clerk in Coutts's bank, London, corre-
spondent of the Oxford Old Bank)—l made up a parcel of
1,500 sovereigns in a bag, which I tied up, in order to be
transmitted to Oxford. Having weighed them, I delivered
the parcel to Quint, the porter, about twelve o'clock in the
day on the 18th of March last.
Richard Quint, porter to Ceutts'a bank—l received on the
day, in question a bag from the last witness, which I put
into a wooden box and nailed down, directing it to Messrs.
Robinson and Parsons, High-street, Oxford. The box I then
put, into a blue bag, which I tied up and carried in a cab to
the, Gloucester Coffee-house. I had often formerly taken
similar parcels in the same way. 'When I reached the
Gloucester Coffee-house, the Defiance, Qxford coach, had not
arrived ; it, however, came up in four or five minutes, where-
upon I delivered the bag to Robyn, the coachman. lie put
it into the off side of the front boot, as he took it from me.
There was no one on the box at the time.
Cross-examined—l never left the parcel at all after it was
delivered to me until I gave it to Hobson.
William Hobson, coachman t6the Penance, which travels
the Henley road from London to Oxford—On Monday, the
18th of Alarch, I signed a receipt at Messrs. Coutts's for a
parcel of 1,500 sovereigns. I left the belle Sauvage at noon,
with one female passenger. I toqk up another female at the
Bell and Crown. At the Regent-Ciros I took up two male
passengers—one was a lad of the name of Cochrane, the other
was a stranger. I arrived at the Gloucester Coffee-house at
half-past twelve. There I saw Quint; from whom I received
a bag, which I placed near the bottom, on the off side of the
boot. There were several parcels both under and over it,
the boot being very nearly full at the time. I took up two
male outside passengers at the Gloucester Coffee-house. They
sat at the back. One, who took his seat near me on the
box, was dressed in an old-fashioned blue coat, had his hat
pulled over his face, and appeared a very mean person. I
next stopped at the Cannon, Knightsbridge, where I took up
a male passenger, of the name of Mountjoy. As I left
Knightsbridge the man on the box said something, in conse-
quence of which I stopped at the door of a ginshop, where a
man put his head out of the door and held up his finger.
That was the prisoner. He got up behind, and sat with his
back to the horses. I proceeded to Salt- hill, and saw the
bag at Longford, between London and Salt-hill, where I
changed horses, which I also, did three times between that
place and Benson. I had taken up a male passenger at
Hammersmith, who stopped at „Henley. I reached
Benson at a quarter to seven, where I stopped at the
Clown. Mr. Shrubb, one of the ' proprietors of the
coach, who had travelled inside, got out at Benson, where
I got down, and gave his servant his carpet-bag out of the
fore-boot. I then went into the Crown, the coach remaining
there about eight or nine minutes. The prisoner then left the
coach, and paid me his fare in the bar of the house. I gave
him change for a sovereign, and took part of a glass of ale,
which he ordered for me. I stopped next at Dorchester, to
put on an extra horse, but did not leave the coach. I took
up tfte marl-bags, and lighted the lamps at Nuneham ; the
man Jll the box got down, and had a glass of ale there. I
pioceeded to the Old Bank at Oxford, bringing with me
seven passengers, and then missed the parcel for the first time.
No luggage of the prisoner's was ever put into the front boot.
I mentioned the loss of the parcel to 111 r. Parsons, at the Old
Bank, and drove straight to the Vine, but could find no traces
ot the bag. The man in the blue coat remained there a few
minutes, and then walked away.
Cross -examined—l have been a coachman on the Oxtlad
road many years. I was a little behind time at Benson. I
looked about for the prisoner for, same little time, having
missed him for a short time. At .Nuneham the horsekeeper
lit one lamp, and I lit the other. I had a glass of ale there,
which was paid for by the man on the box. I took up the
mail. bags at the archbishop's lodge at Nuneham, which is
half a mile from the inn. I afterwards got down, and locked
up the mail-bags in the hind boot for safety.
Re-examined—The prisoner had on a loose great coat. I
only pruned up for the purpose of taking the Archbishop of
York's mail bags, but I did not stop there. When I got
down at Nuneham I gave the reins to Cochrane.
Dennison Cochrane—l sat behind the coachman, with two
female and one male passengers. I got up at the Bull and
Mouth, Regent Circus. I did not see the parcel put into the
boot at the Gloucester Coffee-house. I stood up behind the
box at Nuneham, while the coachman got down, and held
the reins for two or three minutes. No one that I saw went
near the boot during that time.
Cross-examined—The man on the box got down on the
near side at Nuneham.
William Chapman, servant to Mr." Shrubb, at Ilenson—
On the 18th of March, when the, coach came up, I was
standing in the Crown Inn. I saw the prisoner get down
otr the coach there. I saw him put one foot on the splinter-
bar and one on the wheel, and open the fore-boot. When I
came away be was stilLlooking into the fore-boot, and stand-
ing in the same position.
Cross-examined—I noticed the prisoner get off the coach,
but I had never seen him before. I was close to him at the
time. I know Mountjoy, but I did not notice him there.
The man on the box remained there while the prisoner was
looking into the boot.

"AMICUS.

her that he haul dialied engaging to marry her so soon, 1 William Carr, horsekeeper at Benson—On the 18th of
! March I saw llobson get down from his seat on the coach,
r, '' •re was always in a burry.
on arriving at the inn door. I saw a man in a light coat
11410/-11.41-4141421;-Ai. :,.iryt!yor, was then ca..llcd to prove
irriLu.
I with one foot on the splinter-bar and one on the wheel, but I
71E4: . ad yalueil Lhe stock upon the defendant's farm
did not notice hun. Ho was doing something, I cannot say • iit• -.LIZ; . ''
4 Lltp/1!-41;r.stin,eil—The haul held by defendant at Tip- I
Wei ma what, in. the front boot. The coachman handed me a carpet
. bag, which I guve to Chapman. I am certain that only one
.--- tht-bet La tbo 'et:ry -4-4...r.tt in the countb bus it was • (the or, with a light bine coat on) went hear the fore-
-4' very bad land.
(
0.7.;.,'
,:, . '-- 1 man e 7.,, •
' boot.

This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Sergeant SREE then addressed the jury for the
defendant ; and he commenced by observing that he was
surprised, although his Learned Friend had asked for
heavy damages, that he had not laid better evidence be-
fore them as to the circumstances of the defendant,
which it was in their power to have done, and also to.
have shown what real damage the plaintiff had sustained.
• He hoped to be able to satisfy them that the defendant's
conduct had been upright and honourable, and that the
plaintiff had no good cause of complaint. There were
no cases that differed more in their circumstances than
actions of this description. It -frequently happened that
a woman, after having lost that treasure which could
alone make life valuable, was compelled to go into the
witness-box, and while declaring her shame, at the same
time show that she had been made a victim, and had
been betrayed by a man in whose honour she had con-
fided. For such a case the seducer was very properly
made to feel his misconduct by heavy daman.es being
awarded against him. In other cases'a man, after having
raised an affection in the breasrof a woman, would cast
her off, and before her face marry another whom he
believed to bo more wealthy, or fancied was more
beautiful. When such cruelty and avarice was exhi-
bited it was also right that heavy damages should be.
awarded ; but the present case exhibited' no such
cir-
cumstances of aggravation. There was not the slightest
stain upon the character of the plaintiff, and he was in-
structed by the defendant to say, that he could not
breathe the slightest suspicion against the character of
the plaintiff, but that he believed her to be a most
honourable and virtuous young woman, and one who,
under more favourable circumstances, he should have
been proud to make his wife. There was nothing in the
case to throw any slur on the character and cond tof
the plaintiff, and she remained pure and unsullied. W'he
Learned Counsel then proceeded to contend that there
was no distinct proof that the defendant intended to
break the promise he had made, and said the reason
why he declined at present to marry the plaintiff was
dictated more by his affection for her; than by any fickle-,
ness of disposition. He then went on to say that the
defendant was a young man who was entitled to a smal
amount under the will of a relation, but in other re.

spects lie was entirely dependent upon his family. He
had invested this money in a farm, the quality of which
the jury were probably acquainted with, from
its locality at Tiptree • and on that farm
he had lose all his money, and finding he had no means
of surporting this young lady in the manner in which,
from her education and situation, she had a right to ex-
pect, he humbly declined to marry her until his cireum-
stnnces were in a more favourable condition. The
Learned Counsel then proceeded to remark at consider-
able length upon the misery consequent on marriages
where the parties had not the means of properly pro-
viding for themselves and the family consequent upon
them, and said he considered the defendant had acted
the part of a prudent and honourable young man in de-
clining to marry the woman he loved when he felt satis-
fied that he could not provide a proper home for her,
and that poverty and misery must be the result of their
union. At the time the promise was made to the plain-
tiff the defendant %las in the possession of his farm, and
he was buoyed up with the hope that he might realise
a position of prosperity, and he then naturally looked
forward to an union with the woman he loved ;
but those hopes were all destroyed, and he then
sacrificed his own inclinations and passion rather
than run the risk of reducing the woman he
loved to almost inevitable poverty. He denied that
there was any proof that the defendant had absolutely
refused to fulfil his promise, he only desired its post-
ponement until his circumstances were improved. There
was not the least proof of any act of unkindness on the
part of the defendant, but, on the contrary, he had al-
ways acted with the greatest kindness, and it was
proved, that almost up to the present moment, the de-
fendant had always spoken in the most affectionate
terms of the plaintiff, and had shown an anxiety for her
welfare. He then proceeded to urge, that so far from
this being a case calling for heavy damages, he felt satis-
fied that the jury, upon a dispassionate consideration of
all the facts. would feel that the defendant was entitled
to their verdict.