The Sun.
London, England, 1827-09-28 00:00:00

fellow so extravagantly happy ! Fur was scraped from the
crown of a hat, to stop the bleeding ; his head was duly
tied up with the old woman's praskeen ;* and he was soon
in a state of bodily convalescence. Our solicitude was
now required solely for Joe, whose head was too deeply
buried to be exhumated with so much facility. At this
moment, Bob Casey, of Ballyda'kill, a very Celebrated wig-
maker, just dropped in, to see what he could pick up
honestly in the way of his profession, or steal in the way of
any thing else ; and he immediately undertook to get Mr.
Kelly out of the mortar by a very expert but tedious process,
namely,--clihing with his scissors and then rooting our
with an oyster knife. He' thus finally succeeded, in less-
than an hour, in setting Joe once more at liberty, at the
priCe of his queue, which was totally lost, and of the exec,-
sure of his raw and bleeding occiput. The operation was,
indeed, of a mongrel description—somewhat between a
complete tonsure and an imperfect scalping, to both of
which denominations it certainly presented claims.
* A coarse dirty apron, worn by
workihg women in a
kitchen, in the country parts of Ireland.

BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE

UNDER-SHERIFF'S COURT-GLOUCESTER.

WEIGHT V. WEEKEE.

Mr. STONE stated that this was a writ of inquiry,
.under which the Jury were called upon to.say what
damages the plaintiff had sustained by a breach of
promise of marriage. The plaintiff was only eigh-
teen, she possessed very great personal attractions,
and was, very much admired. The defendant was a
man of very considerable property, and of the mature
age of fifty—an age at which a man ought to know
what he was doing. However. in this case, it would
appear that the defendant's object was the seduction
of the plaintiff. It would be proved that in the
summer of 1826, the defendant made advances to
the plaintiff, and offered her marriage. The plaintiff
did not accept him at first, but atter a little time
consented to marry him. The defendant then tried
by every means in his power to inveigle the plain-
tiff to his house, but although she went there two or
three times, it was always in the company of some
third person.. The defendant proposed making a set-
tlement of part of his property upon her, and a per-
son named Proctor, who had since left the country,
was instructed to draw a settlement accordingly.
The settlement was drawn and shown to the plain-
tiff, for the purpose of deluding her, and what spoke
volumes against the defendant was, that the settle-
ment was not worth a farthing, as it was drawn on
a wrong stamp. Still the defendant could not suc-
ceed in his guilty purpose; and the•further to carry
on his schemes, he actually measured the plaintiff's
finger for the wedding-ring, and ordered his own
wedding-clothes, but still the modest prudence of
the plaintiff shielded her from his attempts, as she
would never go to his house except with a third per-
son, and the defendant perceiving that he was not
likely to succeed in his wicked purposes, without
assigning any reason whatever, broke off the match.

The-se were the facts, and he would ask the Jury whe-
ther any damages could be too great to be awarded
against a man of fifty, who set about the deliberate
seduction of a young girl of eighteen, by such means
as had been used.

Mr. Samuel Trotman said—l know the plaintifi
and the defendant. In June '1826 the plaintiff was
at my house. The defendant paid attentions to her.
He wished to pay his addresses to her, but she
-would then have nothing to do with him, and would
not even shake hands with him. Afterwards she
became reconciled to him, and she received his ad-
dresses.

Cross-examined by Air. CARRINGTON.--The
plaintiff despised him at first. She held him in the
greatest contempt. I know a young man named
Tilley. He comes sometimes to my house, but not
very often. He is about nineteen or twenty years
of age.

Priscilla Weight said—The plaintiff, Jemima
Weight, is my daughter. In December 1826, I saw
the defendant. Ile said he should like to marry my
daughter if she were willing. Ilis whole conversa-
tion was about her. He said if she was willing to
marry him, he would settle his property upon her.
After this a marriage settlement was prepared. The
defendant asked my daughter to go to his house to
see what things were wanting there. She went to
his house, but never by herself. Her brother-in-law
. .

went with her on one occasion, and her sister on
another. I saw the defendant on the 7th of March,
in the present year. He then said I hare altered my
mind. I shall not make any property over, and
will have no more to do with it. Since that my
daughter's health has not been so good as it was
before. She has been fretting much about the old
man, and since her being deserted by him, I see her in
tears very often.

Cross-examined.—She cries because an old man
of more than double her own age would not mercy
her. Her health is seriously affected by losing such
a husband. She did hold him in the most perfect
contempt, when he first paid attentions to her; but
she liked him when she had consented to become his
wife. I never heard her say that she never would
live with such an old fellow ; and I never heard her
say that if she had married him she would have got
his money, and left him to go to live in London.
Mr. John Workman said—ln March last the plain-
tiff arid defendant were at my house. The defendant
wanted to settle his property on the plaintiff, and the
former gave directions to Mr. Proctor to draw it.
Mr. Proctor has since that left his residence, and I
don't know where he is. The defendant wanted the
plaintiff to come to his house on the following
Sunday. The old man complained that he could
never get her there by herself, and that three was no
company. I have heard the defendant say that his
property is unencumbered.
He had done business for me; he was a man in credit
now
felt quite
the
tphl Cross- edxj:
tati invoat
was
dki- aotmhr,aetac
recommended
rn)snt
eea
ki
pdt
oeudnmd relationr.of
stamp
oProctor. was
and havet.
reason
ms orn. correct
et o supposeßfßo
fr a m
Na TotaNlrr,rai tagt he
for e settlement,the defendant knewdefendant,
sure that the Jury would see that the defendant's
property was really the object of attack in this case,
and would feel that if the plaintiff's parants had
acted properly towards their child, they would have
been the first to prevent a marriage so unequal in
point of years. With regard to the alleged attempt
at seduction, he was quite confident that the Jury
would see that that charge was wholly without
adefendant
person
ers o nt:enanind
foundation. It was rather late in the day for a man
who had reached 50 years of age to begin the trade
of a seducer. With regard to the settlement being
on a wrong stamp, that was caused by the person
whether the stamp was wrong from accident or de-
who preparedthc
recommended,i tl,vraorni and
g Snathrlbpty
b;t,
the
defendant, but
sign, it was proved that . the person who drew the
bc‘lry'reidotiitntlegaonofidithe plaintiff's own relations. The plaintiff,
as it was admitted on all hands, was much admired;
and there was no doubt that she would marry some
one much more suitable to her than the defendant
ever could be.

The Jury, after remaining in consultation for two
hours, returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages
1351.

A Match of Cricket, which afforded some
excellent play, took place in the Royal Grounds here on
Monday and Tuesday, between the Officers of the 7th
Hussars and 52d, with several members of the Marylebone
Club. Captain Cheslyn's play in particular Was very fine,
having got in one innings no less than 92 runs. Lord
Crofton, Lord C. Russell, Mr. Aislabie, Captain Whyte,
Captain Price, and Messrs. Deedes and Bathurst, were
among the players.--Brighton Paper.