The Statesman.
London, England, 1819-07-15 00:00:00

THE STATESMAN.

apology baying ►een made, end the apology hating
been offered, t►e dee weight which attac►es lo this
Icircurnstance aeght net in be aserinnked.
. .

Mr. Serjrant VAIINIIAN, after a few additional Ob-
servations, called
Mr. Thomas Iteynnlde.—Witoess stated, that he
kept lite 13.11 lon. Plaintiff is his sister-io.law.—
Ile knew the Defendant to be a solicitor in good

practice; his father is a man of considerable pro
party. tieing opposite to witness in Wood.street.—
Miss Spencer came on a visit to wltuess's hosts In
Aegis;, 1818. The Defendant there became se-
quaieted with and visited her (Illegally; and wit-
nest, after a short time, observed that an attachment i
'existed between them. Defendant wrote several
letters to pleintiff.
Here several letters were banded to witness, which
be deposed to be in the baud.writing of Defendant. '
They were then pot in and read. The Defendant is
the strongest manner repressed his lose for Plaintiff, '
sod repeatedly urged how necessary she was to MS
happiness. He frequently expressed his hope of
soon callieg her his wife; he also complimented her
on her amiable and endearing disposition. We ab-
stain from giving the letters at length. as they coo.
tain rather • roandabost expression of love end ten-
derness. They were interspersed with some poetical
quotations on connubial felicity. with fervent prayers;
in conclusion, that the happy pair woeld realize the
charming descriptions of the poet. 'I he letters hie.
lag bees gone through,
Mr. Reynolds's examination was contiseed.—
Plaintiff answered those letters. She visited at the
hoes* of the Defendant's father. The wedding was
Axed for last Chrktusas. but it did net take place.—
In the merge of last February, witness noticed a
greet alteration in Defendant's attentions to Plaintiff.
who shortly after requested him to call upon De-
fendant. and ascertain his intentions with respect to
her. Witness called early in March, sad Defends's'
repeated his attachment to Plaintiff. bet in the latter
end of the same month he declared he would not
merry her (here mimes. regraded Defendant's ex-
pressions, ell to Plaintiff's net beige/ a girl of che-
ese/sr, kc.. as stated by Counsel ; Defend's' added
that Plaintiff allowed of the addresses of soother.
while she seemed attecl.ed to him. Witness, though
irritated at those observations. endeavoured to coo.
coal his feelings from Defendant. ,
Cross.examined.—lle bad heard the Defendant
talk 'boat his losses, but not when he declared. in
the beginniog of March, his intention of marrying
Plaintiff. The last 'Wien was at witness's
I bar. Defendant wes not then inteaicated. nor did
1 sillies, ever see him so. The result of this conver.
1 Winn was, that witness etdered Defendant oat of his
, house ; before his departure he offered to fight wil-
-1 nets. Witness never said he would make the old
man (meaning Defendant's father) bleed. Ile never
. considered Miss Spencer as • har.maid, nor did he
ever say that he cosid not afford to keep two bar.
' maids. Something was said about Miss Spencer
I being oat-asked at a church in Leicestershire. Ile
, heard that Defendant had enquired about, end Nand
, that this was not the fact. Ile saw both the licence
. and the weddiog ring. Ile had nu farther converge-
, tions with the Plaintiff or Defendant oa this subject.
_ . ..

Mr. Charhoe proved the hieing of the licence
for the marriage of Plaintiff and Defendant, it was
dated 18th Nov. 1818.
- Here the Plaintiff's case closed.
Mr. Serjeant Corr.cr addressed the Joey for De-
fendant. lie commenced by expressing his happiness
at having to address so respectable a Ju►y, and one
so folly capable of giving this question the most mi.
este aed impartial consideration. What justice re•
gaited they would no doubt perform, still meesuring
that justice with the temperance which a case of this
description required. Cases of this kind did not al.
ways bear in ►videos, tire appearances they assumed,
from the ingenuity and talents of Counsel, .or could
they be laid before a Jury vilely es they cavorted
between the parties; there being no means of pre,.
ing the different transactions which took place be-
twe►n theparties in secret. It ova impossible to bring
to bring before a Jury the ersi ines matters which might
influence the minds of persons situated as the Plaintiff
and Defendant had been, or which might ha►e operated
In prevent Defendant from fulfilling Lis promise. The
Jury would no doubt give Defeadvat every benefit
arising from such a situation. His Client was a very
young man, who bad lately embarked is the pre.
carious profession of th• law, and it would be for
the Jerry to consider whether they would give such
damages against him, es would blast his prospects
and crush his first entrance into life. Plaintiff was
attached to the meg lady, whose situation appeared
to be that of barmaid at the Bell, yet he perseed
his suit with sincerity. It was riot attempted to he
urged that he was merel► playing with her feelings,
ea the contrary he acted with truth and candour
throughout the whole of the proceedings. The father
of Mr. Cole was arena le his SOWS forming such a
connection, and usterally so, as Miss Spencer bad I
no torten,. The Defendant's hesitation to fulfil his
engagement @rose first from the rtmonstreoces of his
father, and, secondly, from some severe losses which
he bail sustained from the deficiency of the produce
of some mines in which he was coacetn►d. Neat
came the conduct of the lady's brother.in-law. The
Defendant, smarting seder the impression that the
Plaintiff was receiving the addresses of another, while
she seemed to be his only, had remained for several
hosts drinking in Mr. Reynolds's house, previously
to the conversation at the bar, end considering the
irritation of his feeling', it was not to be wondered
at that in the heat of passion he bad used unjustifi-
able language. Defendant knew a verdict would be
given against him ; he newer intended to asperse the
character of bliss Spencer, or any of Intl family.—
The Jury would also recollect that it was Plaintiff's
brother.lo.law, who first made public those espies.
'ions which were so much dwelt upon► in this case,
for the pyrites' of increasing the amount of damages.
Ile should not further trouble the Jury, it would be
for them to slate what, ender all circumstances the
amount of damages to which Plaintiff was entitled.
The Cities JUSTICE summed up at considerable
length. Raving gone over the evidence for Plaintiff,
he observed, that the defence set op was, first, the
remoustrences of Defendant's father, of which there
was no proof; sod secnndly, the looses sustained by
him; added to which came the dreadful imputations
as to the brotber•in-law, of which there w;s not even
an Ittempt at proof. The Pitinliff Wet s you-6 hdy

respectably edeceted and of soluipeached character.
and it world be for the Jery to decide, tinder
all these circumstances, what urns the mono of
(tamers to which the conduct of Defendant subject.
ed his.

The Jury. after a few momvats' consultation, re•
tumid a verdict for the Plaintiff—Damages 5001.

BEFORE THE SHERIFF OF SURREY.

}REACH OF PROMISR OF MARRIAGE.

CROW D. PACKWOOD, WIDOW.

The Defendant ',viola permitted jedganent to go by I
deficit, • Jory of the County of Serrey assembled
before the Sheriff to assess the damages which the
Plaintiff had sustained.
Mr. BARRY, for the Plaintiff, stated the cats. His
Clientlwas, be said, a farmer, and bad been • peblican,
both of which stations in society he filled with greet
eedit to himself. His circumstauces were so coo-
fortable, that be begin to look about for • wife.
and he cast a glance at the widow of the celebrated
Packwood, who had proved that she was worthy of
his choice by leasing her in his last will end test!.
moot 6001. per snows. The ilthaily was, the
Learned Counsel observed, by no moans • pretnioest
object, although it was by no means an objection.—
. About four years ago the Plaintiff and Defendant first
I saw tech other. Soon afterwards declarations of
never.failing affection were reciprocally made, and the
widow Packwood pledged herself to become the wife
of Mr. Gibbs; bet unforteeately for the Client of the
Learned Counsel, her name, though now changed, was
not Gibbs. The widow less ono of the most es-
Inordinacy widows that ever came tote • Court of
Justice. It would appear that silo delighted in @s-
tripping sod disappointing men ; for bet a Stile be-
fore she became orgisainted with his Client, another
suitor had presented himself, and been promised her
hand. A short acquaintance, howem, satisfied the
Lady, and she t.,:ed off her admirer who applied
to the benevolent power of the law, talikh :eve him
• considerable recompence in damages. The Lady
was now the property of another, bet the happy
couple were separated by annual consent, out on ac-
boost of any defect in the temper of either, but be..
cum she was economically inclined, while be was
rather munificent. The Joey would, it was to be
hoped, give by their verdict a warning to all widows.
Several letters, which were stated to have been
written by the Defendant to the Plaintiff. were pet is
and read, in order to show the breathe( promise.and
1 witnesses were examined, all of whom were
cross-esessised by
Mr. Assoc, Counsel for the Defendant, who ad.
dressed the Jery in mitigation of dairies, contend-
, ing, that if his Client had not suffered jedgmeut to
gn by default, the Plaintiff would not have been en•
r titled to more than a shilling damages, as no direct
, promise had been proved, neither bed the animist of
, the loss sustained by the Plaintiff been ascertained to
r sanction the justice of the action. Is support of this

assertion be calhql one tritons.
Mr. AIIZOTT, the Under. Sheriff, isomer! op the
evidence, and the Jury, after some consulted/in, re•
turned a verdict for the Phintiff.—Damages 401.