The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-06-10 00:00:00

STATCSMAN.

the plaiside. The friendship was carried on, and on
the 6tb of August. led, a marriage madmen', between
the parties, was draws up, and executed. Lodging.
were taken. in an agreeable situation, and furniture
bought, wins. sil on a sudden, without any reason
Aging assigveil, the defendant discontinued his visits,
fitted the widow now sought that compensation which
the law alone afforded. He should not have an oppor-
tsmity of again addressing the Jury, because lie uoder-
lened there would not be any witnesses called for the de-
is/teat; sad, if he might be allowed to anticipate the
Node of defence that woulsi be attempted, it would, in
his opinion, be only ridicule. The Jary, however, he
was persuaded, would sot allow themselves to be divert.
ed from the facts that he was about to lay before them,
ISM would give those damages which the nature of the,
011111.
.Sarah Pratt said she lived at Lower Claptoe. In
June, 1621, Mr.. Mathews and Mr. Itevriolds came to
her house to look at some lodgings, and during the time
they were examining them. she heard Mrs Mathews
um, " the room was too small," sod Mr. Reynolds re.
" what this room will not hold tee can put in the
next. Mrs. Mathews appeared about 45, and Mr. Rey-
seith ten years older. Air. Reynolds visited Mrs. Ma-
this every Sunday for a considerable length of time,
until October, and then he did not come so frequently,
and discontineed altogether on the ISth of that month.
Cross-exawiord by Ale. Sergeant VA UGH %N.—She said
the lady had beeo.lodging with b since. Witness
sever was present at the interviews when the defendant
visited her lodger. She did not know that the defend-
ast bad an arm that was penalised; had heard that be
was something in, the earpeNter line.
Thomas Williams said he was clerk to the plaintiff's
httorney, and was a witness to the deed of settlement
which he bad in his band, and saw the defendant exp.
cute it. Mr. Mathews had lived in Church-row in a
respectable way of life.
'l'be deed was put in and read. It appeared all the
property was secured upon the widow. Ideation was
made in it of :?ti houses in the neigilibourboA of Mile-
end.
George Arendt said he had knew* the plaintiff 13 or
14 years: her husband had been dead seven years. The
defendant had acted as executor since her husband's
death. On the kith November witness was present at a
conversation between the parties. Mr. Reynolds, on
coming into the plaintiff's room, asked her " if she had
taken tea," to which she answered in the affirmative, and
observed, " that he bad been so long absent, that he had
become a stranger, and that be had behaved to her very
strangely of late ;" to which he said, "be could not help
it ;" she said " be appeared to have altered hie i nteatioos ;
and he replied " he had altered his mind for the present,
and that he should not come to see her any more." She
said " great expence bad been incurred, she having
bought a carpet and other things to furnish the house .
He answered. " the expence could not be very great, as
she might give up the lodging at Christmas.' She ad-
verted to the marriage settlement having been agreed
to by him, and he thought be had no right to pay any
thing towards it.
Cross-examined.—Never beard the defendant bad hie
right arm paralized. The plaintiff now owed witness ,
SO/., part of which was contracted is her husband's lib
and part since; mould not swear that the defendant bad
the use of his right arm.
Mr. Sergeant VAL'OIIAN, for the defendant, said his
surprise was certainly very great at a case brought in
the way like the present: Parties so far advanced in
Sib were not likely to stiffer that injury which might
have attended an earlier period. If there had been the
bloom of beauty on the cheek of a young lady, likely
to fade by the neglect, cruel neglect, of a false-hearted
youth, there might be some degree of commiseration,
and damages might have been justly required. Instead
hf that there is a widow. admitted-to. he 45 at least, s
'Main fill 10 year, older-wide a poweette any, whoa
the is dragging into a mart of justice for compensa-
tion, because
If you will not, when you may.
When you will, you shall bare nay;"
Of the expression " that he had altered his mind," cer-
tainly did not imply an entire foreskins of the lady.
However, she is determined it should be so, and thus
pursues her dear old man. Perhaps, she was herself
anxious to be rid of the bargain, and sought, eagerly.
for the first opportunity, when she could break off the
affair. lie felt persuaded that, if the Jury should be sa-
tisfied there had been a promise, and a breach of that
promise. they wonld certainly conclude there could not
be any damages, for no injury bad been sustained.
The Lord Chief Justice DALLAS thought there bad
been a promise, and a breach of that promise. The
Jury would consider the evidence which bad been before
thew, and would give such a compensation as they cow
ceivcil the party entitled to. There could not have bees
an injury to the feelings of the party complaining, nel-
ther could there have been an intention on the part elf,
the defendant to secure to himself the property of las
plaintiff They would have soberly and temperately to
think what the widow bad lost by losing a man 10 years
older than herself.
Verdict for the Plaintiff.—Damages 501.