Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1843-04-28
IMPORTANT TO sUITORS IN HYMEN's
COURT

dldd&.
IMPORTANT TO sUITORS IN HYMEN'S
COURT
Lvsarder All me for aught that ever | could read
Could ever hear by tale or history,
The Of true love never did run smooth;
Hernia o cross high 10 be enbrs'd to love!
Lys Or else misgrafed in respect of years =
Her. o spite too old 20 10 engaged to young!
Lys. Or else it stood upon the choice of friends -
Her. o hell to choose love by another's eyol
On Thursday and Friday of last week case
was tried in Washington County Court which for
its novelty md the position of the parties excited
great deal of interest," and it bids fair to excite
still moro--lor we understand that another trial,
at least is still to be had. 1t was an action for
money had and received, and the parties are both
gentlemen of The legal profession, one residing in
this county and one in franklin county. In this
case, the principal witness was the father Of the
ysung lady, whose caarms have provoked n con.
test which, for aught we know, may be quite as
memorable as the Trojan war, though bloodess
and more brief. On his direct testimony rs to
events and correspondence, the plaintiff relied /;
and on most thorough and sciulinizng cross-ex-
animation conducted by MIR. Upham senior, and
some other testimony tending to sustain the de-
fence the counsel for the defendant were obi. ed
70 rest the case. The history is briefly this, MS
gathered from the testimony Of the principal wit
ness. For sometime previous to 1889, an iniima.
cY mad grown up between the plaintiff aud
young lady of this village, and mutual affection
was ulledged, tho the parties had not reached the
defnltive point, viz. n positive engagement. Al
this time IA competitor entered the feld-n Lysan-
der was found, in the person OF The defendant, TO
match this Demerius aud from the testimony it
would seem that he almost adopted part of one of
the identical speeches OF Shakespeare's Lysnn-
der
''I am my lord as well derv'd as he,
As well possessed my love ia than his
My fortunes every ayas fairly rank'd,
If not with vantage, as Demetrius'."
He appeared ms suitor with the appreciation of the
falher--was duly and honoraby informed by the
lady as to her favor to The plaintiff, and inasmuch
as she was nj; bound by any engagements, he was
permitted to try his skill with Cupid's arms, to
whether he could conquer the old love. For egh-
teen months he paid his addresses, advanced mo-
ney and presents, and introduced the lady TO the
circle OF his friends and acquaintance; but at the
expiration Of that time he vas informed that first
love was loo strong for him, and The ladyhad con.
cluded 10 dismiss him and marry the plaintiff
The defendant then addressed the father of the
lady, and as the witness testified expressed doubts
otlhe sincerity OF the plaintiff, and proposed thar
merely a test, he (the falher) should require the
plaintiff to deposit $3.50 in his hands he also sent
bill tor money expended amounting to 1920
and other Items such travelling expenses, time,
horse hire, and the loss of colt by drowning
- 4
he been at home attending 10 his ordinary bust.
ness in all amounting to $780, The father tes-
tilted that he acted agent Of defendant, and as
such demanded of the plaintiff the deposit of
$3.50. Plaintiff refused Witness urged him, de-
caring that it was mere test, and that defendant
would not retain dollar of the money. Finally,
plaintiff furnished the money protesting that de-
PENDANT should not have dollar of it; witness
informed defendant, who ordered the money to be
sent to him, and 1920 was sent, which defendant
retained Plaintiff married the lady, and suisse
quenty brought this suit to recover back the mo-
ney The plaintiff claimed that defendant had
wrongiully obtained the money that il was a
mere deposile made under protest, and with the
assurance Of defendants agent that he (defendunI
Wo"Iu hot ietuU tle noney. OH inc OtHeT manu-
it was insisted that the lady was under obligations
to defendant aud could not honoraby, and would
not, marry plaintiff until these obligations were
discharged; that so il was understood by plain
tiff, and that accordingly defendants bill was aIl-
diled, the extraneous items defendant is u great
wag, Ivy the way,) disaIowed and the balance re.
milIed 10 him. The court charged that il this
money was merely deposi,e in the hands Of de-
PENDANTS agent, as a Test of the plaintiffs snceri-
~, the plaintiff should recover but il il was paid
with view TO discharge defendants cIaims-or
if the plaintiff gave ibis money as present eth
er 10 father or daughter, although protesting that
defendant should not have it, and either of them
sent il TO defendant plaintiff should not recover it,
Verdict for the plaintiff, 1920 with interest Peck
aud Dillingham; for plaintiff; W. X. Upham and
WIN. 7. Briggs for defendant
We omi, names as we have no particular anx-
iety to give TO the names any greater publicity
Than the parties themselves have done. The final
result is of some importance TO lovers, whether
married or unmarrled they may have to pay the
bills OF unsuccessful suiIo'S; or if these bills are
paid, under some circumstances, it seems the law
may compel reimbursement Of the money.
W Robert f.. llorner Esq, has been removed
from the post Office of Trenton, N. J., and Lo-
cofoco takes his place. Horner was a member of
the Harrisburgb Convention in Dec. 1895. and
went hand in hand with john Tyler in supporting
NJ 4 TAN H.. L. II