The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1894-04-14
such scored marriage would be 10 defense to

such secret marriage would be no defense to
this action
8. The jury are instructed that if they find
for the plaintiff, in estimating damages they
are to consider all the facts in evidence as to
the relations between the parties up to the
breaking of the promise; the prospective pc
cuniary and social advantage to the plaintiff
from such marriage; the injury
to the plaintiffs feelings and
reputation by its violation; the
manner and circumstances of its violation,
and the suffering of the plaintiff caused
thereby and its effect upon her means of
earning livelihood in the future. And the
jury are also to take into consideration the
wrong submitted by the defendant and may
award exemplary damages as well.
10. That if the jury find for the plaintiff
and further find that the attempt
to impeach the plaintiffs chas-
tity and character was not made in good
faith by him, but merely as a means OF de-
fense or to injure the plaintiff, then they
may consider those facts in assessing the
damages, but the jury cannot award more
than the amount claimed in the declaration,
to wit, $4,000.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE DEFENDANT.
The instructions asked for by counsel for
the defendant and allowed by the Court,
were as follows:-
l. Before the plaintiff can recover in this
hCu1Ohy UlC Jul lAuSu DCuCF0 lIOul elll uAC
evidence that contract was entered into be-
tween the plaintiff and defendant by which
they agreed with each other to become hus-
band and wife.
g. If the jury find from the evidence that
statements were made by the plaintiff and
defendant in the presence of. or to third per-
sons, that they were engaged to be married
to each other, or that they intended to marry
each other, that such statements were made
pursuant to prior understanding and agree
ment between the plaintiff and defendant, for
the purpose of deceiving such third persons,
and were not made in good faith, such state
ments are not to be taken as constituting or
evidencing the existence of q contract to
marry.
3. The burden of proof to establish the
contract sued on is upon the plaintiff, and
that they should find for the defendant un-
less they believe from all the evidence in the
case that it was mutually agreed between
the plaintiff and the defendant that thay
were in fact to he married.
HER PRIOR CONDUCT.
4. Even if the jury should find, from the
evidence, that contract of marriage was
entered into between the plaintiff and the
the evidence, that prior to that time the
plaintiff had been guilty of unchase conduct
with other men, and that such fact was un-
known to the defendant, then the defendant
was not bound by such contract, but by rea-
son of said fact, if it had existed, he had
the right to refuse to perform such contract,
and he may avail himself to such defense,
whether at the time of his refusal he knew
of such prior unchase conduct or not.
5. If the jury shall find from the evidence
that the plaintiff had been guilty of un-
chaste conduct with Rodes, and that the de-
fendant had condoned such acts. yet if they
find from the evidence that the plaintiff had
been guilty of unchaste conduct with some
other man or men, which said conduct was
unknown to the defendant, the verdict must
be for the defendant, even if the knowledge
of such conduct did not come to the defend
ant until after his refusal to marry the
plaintiff.
6. If the jury find that there was con-
tract of marriage between plaintiff and de-
fer rdant, and also fail to find that plaintiff
had been relieved therefrom by any of the
defepses urged, they may in mitigation of
damages consider the plaintiffs character
and conduct, if the same were bad, and her
previous misconduct