The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1857-05-07
A Breach of Promise Case e-Interesting
to Young Ladies.

breach Of promise has just been mp before the
Court in Rochester, N. Y, where Mary W. Vol.
eotf plaintiff, under the new law of that State,
(Which allows party to suit to testify in his OF
ner own behalf appeared or the stand against
Samuel Snow, the defendant and alleged faithIess
swain Apart from the singuiarity of both parties
appearing as witnesses in their cwn case the case
discioses some other points of interest,-such, for
example,-and 4 very important point-what cre-
ases promise to marry
Miss Walcott swears she expected to be married
to Mr.. Snow, but she cwrs up that Mr.. s. made
no direct promise. But for her own testimony, the
inference, from other circumstances, would have
been pretty strong that such direct promise had
been made He lent her So5 1t one time to make
visit to Connecticut refused to take back the
money when she offered 1t to him; kept on visiting
her at her boarding house; presented her with 8
bird and cage; gave her dasuerreorype, gold peg
ell and book.
This certainly looked strong very strong; but
Mr. Snow seeks to break the force of these little
partiaiities by saying be made presents to other
people in the house where Miss WaIcott boarded
thus: Gave Mrs. Brewster, her daughter q
bird cage; to Mrs. Whitchsr also gave q bonnet
to Sarah Walcott. and one to Mira Whiteher have
carried oysters straw berries, &c. to Mrs. Which.
er's house; Mrs. w. cooked them for me-"
These oystera and strawberries seem to have
had chilling effect upon Mrs Snow, for immedi-
a'ely afterwards, Summer of 1e54)
"fod her people talked of our gong together, and
joked me about getting married told her 1 did not
Wiah TO deceive friends any longer and was deter
nlned 10 stop; we did sop By mutual consent; met
her IN the street next neither of Us bowed; next
met her IN stores did not know she was ,hs sre when
1 went In; next say her to talk with her when her
sser vaI sick at iss Fishs from the time re So pa
rated up to that tina had no conversation with her"
On his cross examination the defendant said he
used to take Miss Wolcott to concerts went once
to hear Jenny Lind, and another time to hear the
Hutchiusons.
The young lady's next scheme to enlist the sus-
capabilities of the unimpressibIe Snow vas
regular coup d etat
During the aunIner shs came to nv office and
asked ms to 90 TO Lecture with her; / thought it
would not look well for us to commence going out
again aftef sgreens to quit; she said people would
not ak any more about than they had done that
she i2d 70 one to go with and she would like TO GO
TO her did not wish to 90 with her any more; did
not wish to mlslesd my frierds had NO intention
OF satting married; shs said she had loved me- aud
she thought ! mad seen ths time loved her she
Ineushe ~ou!a Gs Sony; said bliss " would you
marry person who did MT ant you? said she would
noti did not attend her to any place OF worship or
amusement; ct no time except that mentioned about
her loving me, &C did ever have any conyersa.
ton about love did ever tell her that loved
her; words equivalent had passed. told her in
presence Of Mrs. hi cher that il ever got married
would marry lady who could sing and play miss
Aooctt does not play or sing; spoks also at M
"hitchsrs about long courtship; remarked did not
believe in long oouFt'hip; that il ever married
would not court over six ucnths"
But,-Mr. Snow was also accused of giving Miss
W. a quantity of ''chick weed," and of saying. on
mLre than one occasion, I'VE shall never part
all Of which he, nevertheless most peremp oriy
denied
Mary,--on the other hand, alleges that Snow
never said he would not marry her; never told her
she must not expect him to marry her; never told
her to break off keeping company with him, and
what is more, never on any occasion parted with
out his saying 1--WE shall never part" etc.. etc
The Judge charged that it was not necessary to
maintain the existeuce of promise of marriage to
prove that defendant in express words or terms
made promise to plaintiff Any circumstances
which usually accompany parties while holding the
rea | N of an engagement of marriage might pro
pc ly be laid before ajury, and if sufficient to war
ra / the opinion that such engagement existed
it all the law required II is not necessary that
there should be promise cfma'riage in direct phrase
ei0gy-mo formal promise as required. Frequent
visits ofthe part;es-re ling from the society 9th
ers-seeking TO be apart by themselves-expres-
sions Of attachment-presents-g together to
places of amusement--walks and occasional re.
marks in hearing of others, are circumstances usu
ally relied upon to prove that marriage engage
nent exists, aud if such strorg enough to pro-
duce conviction upon the mind, they are all that is
necessary to answer the law. The jury a: last &C.
counts had not agreed.