Virginia free press & farmers' repository. [volume] (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1827-1832, 1831-11-24

Several other witnesses were called
W the pasintiG, who proved that thew
had often seen defendant at plaintiffs
house.
The defendant declined examiuioe
any witnesses,& the respectiveC ounseI
addressed the Jury. a full review and
recapitulation Of the evidence being
taken pro and con.
For the plaintiff il was commended
that the case vas fully made out. a.
'a'd In the declaration; that there were
two Requisites to be established TO en-
title the, plaintiff to a verdict, wiz
ist' that there was contract Of mar
risss; 2dfy, If there was such con.
tract, that it was broken by defendant.
II WAS argued that these were fully
made out, and that the plaintiff was
entitled to heavy damages for the iniu-
~ sustained to her health, her reputa.
ton and herself; that an extraordina.
~ and aggravated case had been pre-.
sented against the defendant. without
the slightest extenuat,on or jus,ifica
ton on the part Of the defendant il
WAS also remarked that the defence
was conducted IN a novel STYLE, as wit.
nesses we're IN court, and vet. noue
were examined IN defendants behalf |:
that its extraordinary character was
only equalled by the novel and unusual
style OF ieooing practised by the de-
PENDANT.
For the defendant, it was contcnded
mat the case was not Of the Aggrasa
ted description represented by the
plaintiffs counsel /; that the defence
did not require the examination Of
any testimony, a. had been at FIRST an
ticipated, the plaintiffs case being
weak and not requiring any defence !;
that the principal and only mp6rtant
witness on the behalf Of the plaintiff
was her sister, liable to prejudice and
bias created by affection aud the ties
OF nature, from which the purest could
not protect themselves that the case
showed an almost unity of existence
between the sisters who we're ALWAYS
together, on every occasion alluded TO-;
that the testimony Of the principal wit
ness could not be correct; that howe.
yer pure she be, yet it is the fallacy
OF opinion TO which all human nature
- liable that persuades a belief Of
things. existing only in Imagination, in
which witness has au interest, strong
in passion and feeling tina, the whole
affair was q foolish transaction, las
love affairs generally are) approach.
ing almost to childishness; that the
damages ifany } should be merely CON-
pensatory, and only 70 such amount
~ the plaintiff had sustained injury,
and that. - the case presented itself,
n" great injury accrued to the plaintiff,
either TO her health. her reputation, or
her future prospects.
His honor, Judge Halloweii, charg-
&c the Jury that the case was fully
made out by the plaintiff; that an en-
gaeemeat and promise Of marriage,
and . subsequent breach by the de.
fendant were clearly established, and
the defendant should answer in DANA.
ges, the measure Of which was the re-
culiar province Of the Jury.
On Monday. the Jury returned with
q verdict for plaintiff, with three hun.
dred and fifty dollars damages.
For Plaintiff. John NJ. Scott and
8. Kcemle, Esqrs. For Defendant.
George N. Dallas and 8. Rush, Esqrs.
From tic .NeaS Enyia1d Weekly Re1ae.r.
THE WAY To "PoP THE QUESTION. "
on 40 JoHxsoNs AsKIxe."
Among the curiosities with which
the Michigan tables were loaded at tho
late fair in this city, the following an