The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1825-06-29

PENDANT is a clergyman settled in Troy,
in this County. and the Plaintiff daugh-
ter Of the Rev. OTIS Thompson, ofReho-
both. The defendant pursued bis stud
les in theology with the plaintiffs faith
er. Among the witnesses introduced
were three sisters, of the plaintiff, a
brother of the defendant, and clergy
man, Grew. Mr.. Thatcher who was
fellow student in divinity with Mr.. Reed,
and also a cIassmate with him at college.
This last mentioned witness, who was
first called for the plaintiff, stated at
length, and with considerable particular
ity his personal observation of the intlma-
cy between the defendant and plaintiff,
and related also certain conversations be-
tween HIMSELF and the defendant respect
ing the contemplated union of. the par
ties. The usual attentions we're shewn
by Mr.. Reed to the plaintiff that are or
dinarily manifested by persons contract
ed for marriage. The defendant was
much in attendance upon the plaintiff at
home, and several times out of town.
Frequent conversations were had be.
tween this witness aud the defendant,
touching the attachment and expected
union of the plaintiff and defendant
all proving that, if there was not an ex-
press, clearly that there was an implied
matrimonial engagement between The
parties. The defendant on certain &C..
casion declared to the witness that he
had made no matrimonial engagement
tWafer be left college. This witness
also testified that Mr.. Reed had stated
TO him that the plaintiff had expressed
TO him (defendant) wish that his at
tenions should not be continued toeher.
it his affections should at any time be
withdrawn.-The sisters of the plaintiff
testified TO the intimacy which had exist
ed between the plaintiff and defendant.
The defendant did for a long time man
ifest an unequivocal preference for the
society of the plaintiff Conversations
we're often had between the defendant
and witnesses respecting the anticipated
connexion of the parties in these con-
versations the defendant had expressed
his expectations of marrying the plain
TIFF. The parties, while the defendant
was pursuing his theological studies in
Rehoboth, had frequent private inter-
views; often rode and walked alone.
The fact of letter having been writ
ten by the defendant to the plaintiff, was
testified to by one of his sisters. This
1 Iottor s1as NOT OrodncoI ,oJ a,;Jo.oo
was offered which made it at least prob
able that it had been delivered up by the
plaintiff to the defendant. Notice to
produce this letter having been given
without success, the plaintiff was admit
ed TO prove its contents. One of the
sisters Of the plaintiff testified that let
ter TO the plaintiff was handed her (the
witness by the defeudantin bis hand-wri-
ting, and that she (the witness) after.
wards saw this letter. She repeated
some parts of it, which were expressed
in terms no vice oqoivocai, and indicate
ing strong passion in the writer.-The
defendant waited upon the plaintiff to
his ordination in Troy Gin July l324,]
and declared to witness of whom he
had hired chaise for this purpose, that
he wished it to carry the lady whom he
. intended" to marry, or words Of SIM
liar meaning. The defendant has, since
his ordination, been married 10 a lady of
his parish
In the defence it was urged that, al
though there might have been matri-
monial engagement for time between
the parties, il was a conditional one, and
liable to be dissolved al the desire of Ell
ther party; and also that the conduct of
the plaintiff had been such as 10 Justify
the defendant in declining to fulfil any
contract he might have made with the
plaintiff, having in view matrimonial
connexion.
Three or four witnesses were called,
the most important of whom was
brother of the defendant. He testified
that in conversation which took place
between the plaintiff and defendant,
while the former was On visit at his
fathers, both the parties declared that
it was understood and agreed that
either might withdraw from the other
whenever it became desirable. He al
so testified that the plaintiffs conduct
on a certain occasion during the sane
visit was immodest, and fitted to create
disgust in those who witnessed it. No
impeachment of the plaintiffs character
was attempted by any other Witness
There were several witnesses on both
} sides besides those whose testimony we
have imperfectly sketched; but their
evidence did not vary from the facts
: above stated, and were not particularly
important.
The cause wasably argued by Nor
! ton for the defendant, and not with less