The New York herald., 1876-02-29
BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.

A YOUNG DRESS PATTERN MAKERS SUIT FOR
DAMAGES ON ACCOUNT OF BLIGHTED AFTEc-
rIoSs-vERD1cI OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS
IN HER FAVOR.
An interesting breach OF promise case underwent ex-
animation yesterday before the Sherfi's jury in the
Special Term room of the Supreme Court Miss Ger
F. Crawford the fair plaintiff about nineteen
years OF age and exceedingly fascinating in appearance
and manner, having dark lustrous eyes, blooming
cheeks, and a small, delicate figure. The suit
being in the nature OF an action for damages
which were placed at $4,000, for breach of prom
Use Of marriage, was brought against Southwick
HILBERT young three years her senior and also,
the world goes rahor good looking and fashionaby
dressed. The mother that is and the mother in law
that might have been present and apparently
largely interested in the proceedings than either
of the tigant parties. AS matter or course there
large throng In attendance, who listened to the
testimony with that fixed attention characteristic of
occasions of this special nature.
The first witness called the mother Of the plain
tn, Mrs Henrietta Crawford She took her seat in the
witness chair with hrmness that evidently meant
business threw back her veil from her face gave her
head half defiant toss, demonstrating in pantomime
her readiness to the fusade of coming nterroga
tories. She stated that she was widow lady,
residing at No. 246 East Seventy fourth street;
that her husband diod seven years ago; that
Gertrude her only daughter, TO whom sho
devotedly attached and III whose defence she
would If necessary, spend the last drop Of blood in
her body She went on further to say that she knew
the defendant; that he to her on tho Sd OF
November 1874 and asked her consent for her daugh
ter TO marry him; that she, after reluctance,
gave her consent and that her consent only
gwen on the assurance that he would takc good
care OF her; in order that there might not
be any subsequent misunderstanding she told him
plainly that her daughter was poor and had to work
for her living, to which he replied that ii a
question OF riches poverty with him, but simply
marry the girl he loved she added that after this time
h0r anna tn thatF hon Aav md Aftor
stayed all night his homo being in Brookyn that
casionally he brought his friends with him, who dned
there, and always spoke of her daughter his
alanced: and supposing that they TO be married
in the ensuing June she expended about $500 we'd
ding OUTFIT for her daughter. The rest OF her test
mony which was given with such telegraphic rapidly
that 1t utterly impossible to note
than fraction of it, describing the growing cooness
tween the atllanced couple, and the final announce
mont by the defendant that he would not marry her
daughter, giving as reason that his father opposed
the match and threatened to disown and disnhert him
If he insisted on getting married.
Following the mothers testimony was that of the
plaintiff who gave her evidence in clear but quiet
and subdued manner In addition TO corroboratng
the material statements of her mother regarding the
engagement Of herself and tho defendant she stated
that she became acquainted with the latter May 1874
at which time she was working at Nine Demorest's
establishment on Broadway; the defendant sho said,
tried several occasions TO form her acquaintance
they met one another Broadway, but she refused
his attentions; finally the defendant her nvi-
taton TO a picnic, with his name and address accom-
panync it; she returned this invitation and aiterward
their again meeting accidentally In the store, he in
troduced himself, and after pleasant chat in
which, however, he did nearly all the converse
tion, he asked her If she was fond Of flowers,
and she said yes vhereupon he sent her a
bouquet; soon after this ho accompanied her part
of her way home, and these walks ripened
into an increased intimacy and final engagement to
be married lie told her previous their engagement
that he was able to provide her with a comfortable
home; that the 1st OF January 1875 his father was
going TO give him valuable mortgage, which, with the
means he already enjoyed would enable him TO pro-
vide her with all the comforts she could WISH On ac-
count OF her engagement and to oblige him she gave
up her situation.
Southwick HILBERT tho defendant, then took the
stand He admitted the engagement TO marry, but de-
MED that he had made any statements TO the plaintiff
in regard to his prospective pecuniary condition HIS
counsel added to this donial that he bad then
now and was simply clog TO his father. He gave
his reasons for breaking OF their marriage
cngagemen-the threat of his father to disnhcrt him
If he married the plaintiff He added that he had no
fathers business sign for the simple purpose induce
people coming there to pay more attention to him than
they would otherwise.
souihwck Z. HILBERT, tho next witness was tho
father of the plaintiff He stated that he was a real
estate agent that mis- possessed very little bus
ness talent, and without his aid could not support
himself; that he threatened TO dsown him II he mar
ried knowing full well that he could not support
wife, and that all the interest his had in the bust
I what he paid HIM for his support amounting
to about $l2 per week.
Tho last witness was Albert +. Foster He stated
that the defendant told him aud the plaintiffs brother
that his father had given him mortgage worth SIS O00
that he knew OF his spending large sums OF money
IN suppers, sleigh rides and other expensive amuse-
ments. Being asked his business he said he was a
liquor merchant, and on being asked further where bis
place OF business was, he said under the Tribune
'sThat will dor said the defendants lawyers Two
don't want any more testimony from you.
The jury after beng out about twenty minutes
brought In a verdict for So 900 for the paintin