The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1874-07-15
!. .suit Carry. She answered, Sc No, my dear
eli and best nv new home sdots not mHis.

y
q e. and best my new home dops NOT max
the least Impression upon my mind as IRE
CARDS worldly matters. would rather 1aV'
you. my own, that would prove faithful ant
j love me always in q neat house than pal
ace without love; and, rohl my Dearest
cannot give you up. What would not5a
woman support and 60 through with forthe
| man she dearly loves? AL that can say
my well-beloyed, Is that / will love you
faithfully to the end"
Mr. Sergeant Parry: Through the whole
correspondence there was constant reference
to the father not having given his consent
In one letter the lady alluded to an affair
connected with her sister, and said, 81 Wish
ours was settled. but we must not meet trou
BILE half way" so that they were really only
half way. [Laughterl.
Mr. Sergeant Parry cross:examined the
plaintiff: "The defendant is your 8 dear
est, darling Carry" Yes. [Laughter.]
Did you, in September last, write TO this
young girl, from hotel at Croy don, threat
ening to commit suicide! No.
| Lord Coleridge: The defendant wrote
from Croydon that If be had not been sent
for on Tuesday, "By this time my poor
heart-brokcn spirit would have found rest
and my bones would have been laid under
Surry ground. Then Carry would have
been free;" and he also said that she might
die like man; be wrote his last letter home
and to Mlnnie.'
Witness: 1 have said nothing stronger
than that. a taught
His business had suffered much from what
bad happened. He believed that he should
have been better by several hundred pounds
if this had not happened. He wrote also
that he could only seat in pain" and hi;
must be a long bill if he wished to be vel
in after years.
Was it true that you could only seat in
pain " since the breaking off! 1t was
INDIGESTION FOLLOWING DISAPPOINTMENT.
Was it mental or physical? Laughter.
1t was both physical and mental. His doc
tor recommended d twelve-months' retire
mcnt from business. DR.. jolly advised this
Further: 81 have tried all ! could to gel
well: i have taken plenty of good port
Oh, the heart, the heart!" Had the port al
9Sected the heart? ILaughter.] That referred
to letter of hers about being mean.
Rcexamined: He was strong and healthy
until he bad this disappointment. 1t affect
ed his health, and he applied to DR.. Jolly
| Witness was told that he must leave bust
ness for twelve months, and he thereupor
shut up business altogether.
This was plaintiffs case.
THE DEFENSE.
Mr.. William Golden said that be never
saw the plaintiff until June, 1878, but knew
that he had correspondent with his daughter
He had letter from the plaintiff in March
but never answered it. He saw him for tht
first time on the 14th of June, but he hat
no previous knowledge that "the man
was coming. On the Wednesday following
the plaintiff came into the dPawing-roon
and said, Have you any objection to my
marrying your daughter?" Witness said
eyes, 4 very great objection" lie said
"Why:" and witness said, /" must know
something of you first"
THE GIRLS COMPLAINT.
| Witness said he thought the plaintiff ha(
better drop it altogether, because bis dauSh
Ter Was not well enough to be married. Sh
was weakly, and had Jumps in her neck
She was only half Il child-she was twin
i [Laughter.]
Lord Coleridge could hardly agree that
twin was "half a child" [Renewed laugh
teri
Witness continued: He never gave hi
consent to the plaintiff counting his dauGhte
1T any time.
LORD coLERIDGEs sUMMISG-UP.
Lord CoIeriGge, 10 summing up, said tina
the simple questions were whether contlHc
had been made and broken; and if so, wha
damages the defendant should pay TO tn
plaintiff. There was 10 doubt that this wa
an unusual action. and he hoped for the homo
Of both sexes that it might long remain so
and though their duty was to administc
justice irrespective of prejudice, yet ever,
gentleman must hope and trust that this knt
of action would long remain unusual. Their
was great difference between man and ;
woman bringing an action Of this kind:
difference which was founded upon the diff
ference between the two sexes, which VA
independent Of law and act Of Parliament.
The legal rights Of the two sexes were o
course precisely the same: yet it was inpos
| sibe to say that the feelings OF men Of homo
and propricty would be the same when the.
were considering an action of this klnt
brought by man as they would be whel
this action was brought by woman. Pro
baby they would think that there was con
tract to marry, and that it had been broken
and, therefore,
TIE REAL QUESTION
would remain-that Of damages. Now. wha
bad the plaintiff lost: Judging even by thu
photograph, he had lost very prett,
woman, but one who at the time of thu
breach had made up her mind that she dix
not care farthiug for him. Then what wa
the money loss! 1t was plain that Mr.. God
den never gave his consent to the marriage
aud the whole tone Of the affair was this
that he did not intend to give any money i
Il marriage took place without his consent
IF this were so, then the plaintiff hat
lost a wife who was possessed of no none!
whatever. Then as to the injury to the feel
ings, that they would consider all that tn
plaintiff had done and what feeling he hat
shown; because, if he had acted withou
good feeling. then probably bis feelings wer
not very much hurt. He could understand
man treasuring up loYeletters as memorie
of happy but hopeless past; but it was
very different thing when those letters wer
handed over to the attorney to be used il
court to wiring damages from the young lady
after she had prayed him for Gods sake Il
let her have her letters back; and he hat
answered, "Your letters being my chief eyi
dence in law, cannot part with same at pre-
sent" He had, beyond this, threatened t.
send one of her letters, which was full
gushing expressions, to her father, so that h
might see how she had written. The jur.
would deal with the whole question as mel
=: of honor and sense and feeling, and say,
| tbnv tbouuht that the contract had been mad