Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1857-05-09
A Breach of Premise Case-Interestina IA
Young Ladies'. =

A breach of promise has lust been nj before the
court in Rochester, N Y, where Mary w. Wal
colt, Pialntih, under the new law Of that State
(Which allows party to suit to testify in his or
her own behalf) appeared on the stand against
Salnuei snow, the defendant, an alleged faith
less swain. Apart from the singularity of both
Pdfnes appearing as witnesses in their own case
the case dlscloses some other points of interest,
such, for example-and a very important point
"hat creates promise to marry, -..
Miss Walcott swears she expected to be mar
rled 10 Nr. Snow, but she owns up that Mr. s.
made no direct promise. But for her own testi-
mony, the inference, from other circumstances
would have been pretty strong that such direct
promise had been made. He lent her sos at one
time to make visit to Connecticut-refused to
take back the money when she offered Ii to him
kept on visiting her at her boarding house; pre-.
sented her with bird and cage; gave her a da-
guerreotype, gold pencil and book
This certainly looked strong, very strong; but
Mr.. snow seeks to break the force Of these little
people in the house Where Raeot
thus: "Gave Mrs. Brewster, or her daughter a
bird cage; to Mrs. Whitcher also; gave a bonnet
to Sarah Walcott, and one to Mrs whitcher;
have carried oysters, strawberries, &c, to Mrs
Whitcher's house; Mrs. w. cooked them for
me-"
These oysters and strawberries seem to have
had chilling effect upon Mr. Snow for irnme
diately afterwards, (SuInmer of 1854 y
Told her people talked of our going together
and Joked me about getting married told her I
did not wish to deceive friends any longer, and
consents met her in the street next; neither of us
bowed next met her in store; did not know
she was there when went in; next saw her to
talk with her when her sis er was sick at Miss
FiSh's; from the time separated up to that
time had no conversation with her"
On his cross examination, the defendant said
he used to take Miss Walcott to concerts; went
once to hear Jenny Lind, and another time to
hear the HutchinsOns
The young lady's next scheme to enlist the sus-
capabilities of the unimpressible Snow, was
regular coup d'st1t.
During the summer she came to nv office
and asked me to 20 to lecture with her; Thought
II would not look well for us to commence going
ont again after agreeing to quit; she said people
would not talk any more about us than they had
done; that she had no one to 60 with and she
would like TO 20; told her did not wish to 90
with her any more did not wish to mislead INV
friends any more, as had no intention Of getting
married she said she loved me, and she thought
had seen the time loved her; she thought
would be sorry; said |, Miss w. would YOU mar
ry person who did not want YOU said she would
not did not attend her to any place of worship
or amusement; at no time except that mentioned
about her loving me, &c, did we ever have any
conversation about love nor did | ever tell her
that loved her no words equivalent had ever
passed told her in presence of Mrs. Whticher,
that If ever got married would marry Lady
who could sing and play Miss Walcott docs not
play or sing spoke also at Mr. Whitcher's about
long courtship; remarked l did not believe in
long courtshiP; that if ever married l would
not court over six months.n
MI SHO" was also accused OF g1vlng
Miss w. quantity of ''chick weed ,, and Of saw
ing, on more than one occasion, :. we shall never
part, all Of which he, nevertheless, most per-
emptorily denied.
Mary, on the other hand, alleges that Snow
never said he would not marry her; never told
t her she must not expect him to marry her never
Told her to break of keeping company with him,
ana what Is more, never on any occasion parted
without his saying "we shall never part,n ETC.
The Judge charged that il was not necessary to
maintain the existence Of a promise of marriage
TO prove that defendant in express works or terms
made promise to plaintiff. Any circumstances
which usually accompany parties while holding
the relation OF an engagement of marriage might
properly be laid before jury, and if sufficient to
warrant the opinion that such engagement ex
listed, 1t was all the law required IL not neees-
SdTy that there should be a promise Of marriage
IN dtreet phraSeology-no formal promise is re-
CURED Frequent visits Of the parties-retring
from the society Of others-seeking to be apart by
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES of Northumberland
going together to places of amusements-walks
and occasional remarks in hearing Of others, are
circumstances usually relied upon to prove that a
marriage engagement exists, and If such strong
enough to produce conviction upon the mind, they
are all that is necessary to answer the law. The
jury at last accounts had not agreed.