The Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1822-1829, 1824-06-15

Sdrdge, jan. ' Godt,g aud Eror.
THIS action, Tor breach of PROMISE of
marriage, had for many days excited the
expectations of those Who ARE fond of lIn
1t heilg thought that many cWcumstan
cas- of "A laughahic nature would br eluri
dated In The course al the trial. On this
account, aud because numerous friends oi
both parties attended Ia hear The cause, the
court MAS brlmful of auditors. The facts
which we're submitted to the Jury we're
chiefly as follows; The plaintiff isin part
nership with. or ut least IN the employ Of
his father, respectable hair dresser nj
Romscy. The defendant Mr.. Godfrey, Is
the son of grocer and tallow chandler in
The same town, and MAS married Ia the
lady who is the cause of the proceedings,
aud whose maid.n name WAS Mary Ann
Fryer In the ea,ly part of the last year.
The plaintiff had, for the last ten long years.
paid his addresses To Miss L. and as will
appear, received from her reiterated promi
ses that he was the happy man. The dc
PENDANT pleaded the statute Of limitation,
but did mol resort to il ON the niah Al the
time The plaintiff commenced The suit, hut
i,is sui, of lnNe-- Miss Eyer resided With
an aged aunt by the name of Jones.-'rhe
old lady was aNrlse Ia the connrxion, aud
the young couple were therefore compelled
! Ia have recourse To secret meetings IN the
COW house, Sc.l through thu existence aud
confidential exertiuns ot the sirvaut, MIS-.
! Elizabeth Judd-only 40 yeaIs old This
hand maid of CApld aud the plaintiffs sis
ter very decent and reputable looking
woman, clearly proved repeated promises
by Miss Frye, 10 marry the plaintiff i'm
mcdlately on the death of her aunt. About
Christmas, 1922, Mrs. Jones died and her
will, which WINS proved by Mr.. Godfrey,
rs her executor, left Miss Dryer the owner
of some few thousands of British coiu.--
! The plaintiff, d,licatcly roIraining from
personal intrusion too suon After the death
of poor Mrs. Junrs, sent his sister above
mentioned to Miss Fryer with every tx
precision of undiminishcd allrction-NIss
I Fryer repeated her promises-ne,er io be
/ fulfilled But why? After Ten years fidelity
whit potrnt cause should change ihr mind
Of Mary Ann Mr.. Godfrey had read the
aurt's will, and he fell in love with the
iaihIcss lrgalre, who, too susceptible of his
nsinuaihg attentions, withdrew her favor
! from the anxious MIR Savage, aud placed
her changed affections IN her aupi's cxccn
tor
The courtship Of her second ke should
say next ndmlrer) was much more mief,
md much more effective than tmat of the
deserted plaintiff, In the May of 1823 Miss
Fryer became Mrs. Godfrey" Satagr's
occupation, gouc.' His 10 year, si,Sc
had all brrn sprui III vain, and his patient
declaration, that he would gladly wait " If
it WIRE twenty years longer was of M
avail Every prnmisc thai Miss Fryer
had made, even HE solemn vow, sanrtiied
with Hiss on the Bible, after he had been
treating her with rum and VIM, were all
violated, and the plaintiff had no consola
i don, satr what the laws Of the country
might afford Mr.. Savage is about Thirty
five years Of ag", and earns right shiings
every week and Mrs Godfrey is in her
forticth year, aud Of Il consliluliDn--not
quite rs etr"ng as her pocket
No ai'urssr5 Wcie called ON behalf nT The
defendants bnl severe remarks on the cyl
drure were made, in u vein of acuh and
ironica argument, OF above an hours dnfa
iiou, by Mr. 4. +, Williams, lhrira advocate.
The Jury consulted few minutes, and
then compensated Mr.. Savage for his two
fold loss of Miss Godfrey and her money.
] by verdict for plainlin,-Damases Zoo