The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-09-05 00:00:00

-.;7*

married. She did not know that 111 r. Armstrong, her
father's landlord, bad distrained for rent.
Re-examinedo—Since the defendant at the first non-,
rersation promised her sister marriage, be had re-
hewed that premise several times.
P. Thompson, a brother of the plaintiff, is a clerk
in Mr. Armstrong's office, and knew the defendant's
band-writing well, from his seeing him write at the
office, whore be frequently was. Mr. Armstrong had
not distrained for rent ; but a Mr. Dobinson had issued
an execution against his father, when Mr. Armstrong
claimed rent.
Rev. John Heyshaw proved the marriage of the
defendant with Mies Oliver en the 7th of November.
1810. He knew nothing of the families of Miss Oli-
ver or of Mr. Blamire.
Mr. Scsawrr addressed the Jury on behalf of the
defendant; ha said be did not know that he could do
better than to keep up the merriment and good hu-
mour which his friend bad introduced, for really the
cause could not but excite a smile. There had been
no attempt made to describe the distress of Miss
Thompson on this occasion, or indeed that she had
lost a shilling, and therefore the Jury would treat it
as it deserved. The father was a man who confessedly
was in indifferent circumstances, and it was no dif-
ficult thing, to foresee that what damages the Jury
gave, if any they gave, would go into the pocket of the
attorney. as the landlord of the plaintiff's father. The
young man, when he commenced his visits, was not
more that 17 or 18 years of age, but in no one letter
that had been read, alluded to a marriage as likely to
be the consequence of their correspondence. He was
introduced at the age of 17 or 18 by the father's
landlord, and bad continued acquainted with the
father for six years, without a time ever being fixed
when this marriage was to be solemnized. The de-
fendant was the natural son of a gentleman of pro-
perty, bat in his own right had no claim to wealth,
nor could have any. He was permitted to visit Miss
'l'.. until the father was blamed for permitting him to
be assiduous to his daughter, under circumstances
nuexplained for two years, when the neighbours
noticed it. Why had not Miss Thompson's father
communicated with the defendant's father, as his
daughter's reputation was then somewhat critically
placed? At that time they were dealing with a man
under age, and having taken him by surprise, they
obtained from him something like a promise of mar-
riage. But they had not much reason to suppose that
it would be fulfilled, for his Learned Friend bad glanced
at an inconvenience attending it during the father's
life. He, perhaps, was mistaken, but he thought the
love in this case was not particularly warm ; he had
heard his Learned Friend say, that he was not skilled
in amatory matters. but if he bad ever felt as be
had described these loves, he thought that in absence
he would pine and grow thin and slender; but in-
stead of that, we hear that Mr. Blamire writes from
the Ball and Month that be grew fat. What woman
would say that a man loved sincerely that grew fat in
her absence; the general rule is, that he must pine.
and grow thin and sleek, and she must do the loose;
but we do not hear that that is the case in the present
instance with either party. When he introduces his
horses to his mistress, it was natural to expect that
the comparison would have been, that Cheesy was as
far superior to all other horses at Newcastle, as she,
bliss Thompson, was to all other ladies, and not to
Jack about Carlisle. This was not very passionate
love. As to his letters, they were just such as a boy
would wi ite. A woman at 18 or 20 knew the value of
these kind of letters, and acquired a wisdom of these
matters at a much earlier period than a man. Would
it not have been better for Mr Thompson to have
said to Mr. Blamire, Sir, you must not come to visit
env daughter till you bring your father's consent?
But instead of that lie is encouraged to visit and raise
his youthful passions. We bear nothing of Miss Thomp-
son's pining, being confined to her bed, or that a sigh
or tear is shed fur the loss of her lover ; or that the
smallest imputation is cast upon her character; and
if a verdict is given for the plaintiff, let it be remem-
bered that it is falling upon a begging boy, who is net
worth a shilling. Let it also be remembered, that if
they had married, the probability is, that they would
sow be in misery, as there was every reason to sup-
pose that Mr. Blamire, senior. would not have given
his consent to their nuptials. These promises were
obtained before the youth was of age, and such en-
gageusents are generally of an unstable nature, when
they are given before the party has had an opportu-
nity of seeing the world. The Jury must consider
this as a boyish attachment, wasting itself on two or
three sheets of paper. and frame their verdict seeped-
ingly.
Mr. Justice BATLEY minutely detailed the evidence,
with comments to the Jury.
The Jury, in about a quarter of an hour. gave a ver-
dict for the plaintiff—Damages 1001. costa 4Qs.