Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-02-13
The Law of Courtship.

We clip from an old paper the follow
ing account of trial for breach of pro-
mise of marriage, in which the judge
laid down a new doctrine, which we
should not be sorry to see adopted: "a
case was recently tried in Rutland, VT,
in which Miss Munson recovered one
thousand four hundred and twenty-five
dollars of Mr. Hastings for breach of
marriage contract. The curiosity of the
thing is this: the Vermont judge charged
the jury that no explicit promise was
necessary to bind the parties to mar
riage contract, but that long continued
attentions or intimacy with female was
as good evidence of intended matrimony
as a special contract. The principle of
the case undoubtedly is, that if Hastings
did not promise, he ought to have done
so-the law holds him responsible for
the performance of his duty. A
most excellent decision; most righte-
Gus judge, compared with whom Daniel
would appear but common squire
We have no idea of young fellows dangl-
ing about after girls for year or two,
and then going off, leaving their sweet
hearts half courted; we hate this ever
lasting nibble and never a bite, this
DCtlI1lS Vic DuSH CblItl llCfCI Gtell hlAi5 thS
game; it is one of the crying sins of the
age. There is not one girl in twenty can
tell whether she is cOurted or not. No
wonder that when Betty Shippers cousin
asked if Billy Doubtful cOurted her, she
replied, don't know exactly-he's a
sOrter COurtin' and a not sOrter courtln'.
We have no doubt that this Hastings is
one of these sOrternOt cOurtin' fellows,
and most heartily do we rejoice that the
Judge has brought him to book with a
one thousand four hundred and twenty
five dollars verdict. The Judge says that
long continued attentions or intimacy is
just as good as a regular promise. Now,
we do not know what would pass for
intimacy according to the laws of Yer
mont, but suppOsing attentions to con-
sist of visiting girl twice week, and
estima ing the time wasted by Miss
! MunsOn at each visit to be worth dol
lar, (Which is too cheap, Mr.. Hastings
has been making fool of himself four
/ teen years and some odd weeks. This
! decision makes a new era in the law of
| love, and we make no doubt, will tend
| to the promotion of matrimOny and mo-
rality. - Exchange.
| The case noted above was actually
tried at the Rutland County Court sew
eral years ago, and the substance of the
/ Judges charge is, probably, correctly
stated Notwithstanding the evident at
tempt to be jocose and witty at the eX-
pense of Vermont law and Vermont
courts, is not the principle, as laid down,
| good law and common sense everywhere
In cases where parties cannot be wit.
ncsses in their own behalf, how is con,
tract of marriage, or any other kind, tc
be proved except by circumstances L.
the charge to the jury, alluded to, any
thing but a statement that, from the cir
cumstances, they were at liberty to i'm
/ ply contract and that proof of an eX.
press contract was unnecessary? 1t j.
nothing, after all, but the well-knowr
| rule of circumstantial evidence. We ap
prehend that any intelligent court woult
hold that this Vermont Law was gooC
law everywhere. ED.