Delaware state journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1870-1883, 1872-01-30

An English Breach of Promise c".

An English Breach OF Promise case.
An action loi breach OF romise was tired
in Liverpool recently. The plaintiff was
Miss Charlotte Charles, aged 10 years, and
the defendant, Mr. Peck, q spice merchant
in the city. Mr. Day, Tor the plaintiff, said
when she was II years Of age Miss Charles
became acquainted with the defendant, who
at that time was in his 2lst year, amt
cl,rk.
Her family lived opposite the defendants
mother, who kept an eating-house. Their
acquaintance gradually rlpened into
warmer friendship, and the young gentle
man became a regular vi sltOr al her iather's
house. lie shortly alter b3came her aceepte
suitor. 10 April, 1869, she went to York,
and while absent she received from him
several letters couched IN the most aiec-
Tomato term.
lie promised 10 90 and see her at an taily
day; but Mr. Peek displayed frugal mind.
His visit to his lady love was dependent ON
receiving Tree pass on the Great Northern
Railway, and his claim for this privilege was
that his mother exhibited the time table al
the door oil her eating house. Not succeed
ing in getting a tree ticket, lie abandoned
mis- intention OF ing To visit her Mt York,
but wrote loving letters TO his "dear and
dearest Charlie;" after she lad informed
him tnat she purpOsed 'eiuIning home, her
af. cliOnale Janus advised h'r TO go by Il
tn I'd class carriage, as she would have moe
company than in amy OF the other compart-
ments
In lhe autumn Of 1870 arrangements were
+ male tor thtir nuplials, tie defendant aclu-
ally going 10 the extent of attending sales
with the object ol purchasing furniture for
their future home.
: lie made her soU,e pl esents-lurs, engaged
ring, eic.-dnd everything was prepared Tor
the marriage, the day fixed, the number OF
bridesmaids, the color Of the wedding dress
selected, and everything arranged; but,
! without reason tr excuse, he broke of the
, engagement in a most contemplate manner,
7 adding 10 the griel, sorrow, and pain he had
= already heaped upon this young woman, a
c coarse and brutal insult, that noLe but such
us he would be guilty OF, that while he
could have many other young ladies with
money he took her (plaibuh) with ouly her
clothes.
, Miss Charles said hat whsle she was al
York in 1860, size received good many let
ieTs from defendant, addressed to my dear
est Charlie" and signed "YOuT afiectlonaie
James" 10 one of them he express "a his
. sorrow for being alone, but MS her absence
was Ter the good OF her health il could mo-
Il be helped. lie had not ct his photo
taken, and he should ask lea mas permits
sion to 60 and see his loved one at York
n lie would try and get q fee pass rom til,
company, az it would not be adyis ,be {,
pay The fare for SO short time.
lie was ple Used with tie beautiful flower
c she had sent him, ald as slight return ht
begged her to accept (about two dozen as
h terisks MS kisscs) In answer 10 lurlhc
C questions witness said when they wer
speaking Of the wedding preparations, an
e defendant had obtained her fathers conseu
Ii to the marriage defendant expressed dc
cided objection 10 seeing any cabs or hack
IL, ney carriages at the wedding. II cab va
y seen IN the bridal cayalcnde he ceItanl
." would not marry her II there were carr
ages at the WEDDING he cid not see any d,
RI cqssty Tor blidts msids. When the subje,
Ie OF conversation turned apun the kindol drei
which she should wear at the wedding
ie pniuiiiT herself expIe sed her preference lC
;, white alpaca but defendant said he shou
To like T. see her wearing white sill
dress.
IN The jury returned a verdict for the plant
M damages el25.