The Shasta courier., 1871-12-09
SHASTA COURIER.
THE WHEATLY-POWER BREACH
OF PROMISE CASE.

nlS case was the lrSt called upon the
docket of the District Court at the present
term and lasted over one week. A num-
Der of witnesses were examined both in
behalf of the plaintiff and defendant, but
the testimony given below practically en-
bodies the "case," and the additional evi-
dence addueed was principally "hear-say"
or "my opinion based on what heard
others say of the case, which simply
amounted to a rehash of common report"
or irresponsible neighborhood gossip. AS
starter wegive copy of the 'complaint"
and "answers," followed by the evidence
Of the principal witnesses copied exactly
from the Clerks record)
COMPLAINT AND ANSWER.
Action for Damages, brought in District
Court of the 9th Judicial District
Carinda Powers, plaintiff, VS. John
Wheatley, defendant.
Bracket and Chadbourne, attv's for
plaintiff and J. S. Follansbee and +. Il G.
a. Garter atty's for defendant
The plaintiff alleges the following facts
constituting her cause of action
That on or about the first day of March
A. d. 1869, at the Town of Millyille in
Shasta Co, State of California, the plain
tiff being sole and unmarried, the said
defendent in consideration of the mutual
promise of the plaintiff to accept and marry
him; faithfully promised to marry the said
plaintiff
That confding in the said promise of
the said defendant the said plaintiff has
remained and continued and still is sole
and unmarried, and has hitherto been
ready or willing and was up to the time
that the defendant married another person,
to wit: Miss Hattie Bidwell which occur
red in Sept A. d. 1871, and before the
commencement of this acticn, to marry the
said defendant
And although reasonable time has
elapsed since said promise and undertaking
for the defendant to marry the plaintiff
AID yet although requested so to do, has
neglected ard refused to fulfill his said
promise, and undertaking. aud contriving
Gritty to deceive and injrue this plaintiff,
has married Miss Hattie Ridwell to the
damage of this plaintiff in the sum Of five
Thousand Dollars:
Wherefore, the said plaintiff demands
Judgment, against the said defendant for
the sum of j i've Thousand Dolars aud the
costs of this action.
ULAnINDA POWERS,
By j. w. Bracket Counsel
Shasta Sept. l4th, 1871
The above was duly verified by the
plaintiff before County Clerk, Shasta County
Sept 14th, 1871, and fled in the Office OF
said Clerk the same date.
On the 25th day of Sept following, the
defendant answered by his attorneys as
follows:
Now comes John Wheatly the above
entitled action, by John S. Tolansbee and
E& C A. Garter his attorneys, and Tor
answer to the said plaintiffs complaint in
this action
lst, Admits that he p: omised to marry
said plaintiff and that he married Miss
Hattie Bidwell in Sept. 1871, and before
the commencement of this action
End, The defendant denies that the
plaintiff remained sole or unmarried by
reason of confding in said marriage
promise made to her by this defendant
3rd, The defendant claimes that the
plaintiff was ready or willing to fulfill said
mutual promise OF marriage made between
the said plaintiff and this defendant alleg-
ed in her complaint
4th, The defendant denies that the
plaintiff ever requested the defendant to
marry her
5th, The defendant shows to the Court
and AYERS that the said promise of marriage
between the plaintiff and defendant, was,
by the mutual consent of the said parties
thereto, abrogated and dissolved, and the
defendant released from said promise, bv
the express consent of the plaintiff prior to
his said marriage with the said Hattie
Bidwell.
9Th, The defendant further shows and
alleges, that for long time previous to
the time when the said promise of mar
riage was dissolved by the mutual consent
of the plaintiff and this defendant and
ahrogated and the defendant was released
therefrom as aforesaid, the plaintiff became
cold and Indifferent towards the defendant
and neglected to reciprocatc his afectionate
sentiments towards, her, and neglected to
return his attempted correspondence with
her; and prior to the defendants said mar
riage with Miss Bidwell, the plant # be-
came aud was engaged to be married to
one William Henry Wilson by mutual
promises of marriage made between the
plaintiff and the said wilson
Whereupon the defendant claims full
defense to plaintiffs action, and will ask
for Judgment on the trial that the action
be dismissed and that he have his costs