Court Of King's Bench, We...
The Times, 1824-12-07T00:00:00

Iiar. ABRAHIAM stated, that this was an ac-tion for breach of' promisegoF garriage, which the defendant, by, his plea, denied. Mr. BTOUGa ' opened -the case on the part of the plaintig When he had stated thecircumetances which attended this ease, and still more when he haEd establishedathem. in e;idence, lie was sure the jury would feel with him that there never-was a breach of marriage contract biought into Court more rnelanefSoly in its effects, on the suf- ferer, or more calculated to excite indigniation egainet theman who hail done the wrong. The plainti-ff was the clanghter of a man, very respe-3table for his condition in life, who had kept ani inn ; but who had retired from business to the villge of WVarborough, in the county of Oxford. She had beem edutated with the greatest tenderness and cAre,broughttapwitnthe utmnostpro.. priety, and possessed great personal attractions. In August, 1823,. she unfortunatelv became acquainted with the defendant, then a lieuztenant in thelMadras Infantry, and on leave of absence in Eng-. land. He was the son of a man of considerable wealth, who had formierly carried on a profitable trade in Casae..street, Leicester..- squiare, but who had now retired oni his fortune. Miss WhartonL was on a visit to one of her brothers whbo resided at- WVelworth, when she first saw Captain Lewis. ile was exceedingly determinedl to make her an offer; and communicated hisi,_T to her brother, who, withi a delicacy which marked the conduct ot the family throughout the whole-transaction, and which couldl not be ex- ceeded in aniy station of life, explained that his sister was destitute of fortune,and referredl Capt. Lewis to hist father. The defendant declared that fortune was not his object ; that his affections were entirely de- voted ; end that he was determnined to proceedl. Finding 31r. Lewis resolved to continuie his addresses, Mlr. Henry Wharton called uporn Mir. Lewis, sen. and explained his father's want of fortune; but expresqsed his belief that the expense of the lady's outfit would be de- frayed by the family. Mr. Lewis did riot oppose the inclinations of Iiis son,but desired to be intreduced to his intended daughter-.in-law, and invited her and her relations then in town to d'Ine with him oni the following Sunclay. Before that day, some enemy of the Lamily .!eat an anonymous letter to Mvr. Lewis, calumniating the pla3intif in consequence of which, the intended visit was postpones un til he had made inquiries. Thiese inquiries were made; the insinuations were discovered to be, as in fact they were, in all essenitial particulars, utter falsehsoods, and the connexion was re.. newcd withi the full approbation of llr. andlifrs. Lewis. The plain. tiff now visited themr; was received by them as an intendeddaugzhter; and introduced in that character to their friends. At last, sne left town on a visit to her brother George, who k-ept that most respectable inn, thle King's Arms, at Mlaidenbeacl Bridge, and was speedily followed by thie defendant, who, at one time, spent three weekrs in the boute as the guest of her brother. In his absence, he wrote leters wichmanfetedthefeveny f his attachment, and were fullof toseprotstaionswhic wee mot iteretin to the parties, andappare mot vpidto he estofthe wold n one of them, datd i Setemer.i82, i whch e adressed her as his "dearest and oat elovd Amlia, he pokeof hr as "1necessary to his ex- istnce;" f hmsef a "amos wid"in her absence; and called onhe to pity him as most wretched, tilbecoulddseeher. Upon one occsin, when at her brother's, he entreated her,in order toque his anxieties, and assure him of her love, to join in signingr a solm vow, by which they became outnallypledlged to love and comfort each other through life. From Mlaidenhead, shereturned to herfLa.. ther's house ; and here he continued to write io a simiilar strain, be- seeching her to make arraLngements for his reception at WiiVrberouoh, and declaring himself "1 wild" with the misery of abseace. illis wish was granted;, he visited her at the house of her father; and there repeated the assurances of au affection which circumstances cotuld not alter. The violence of his passion could little brook the delay which the prudence of his friends interposed'- for thougth they gave their deliberate sanction to the matclh-ilougi they loo'ked on AMiss Wharton and treated her as the future wife of their eon- they still were desirous that the marriage shiould not take place till the eve of his departure, lest its probable consequences should be inconvenient on the voyage. He therefore pressed for a private union with an iMpDrtunity which agitated her spirits and seriously ff' ted he health ; but, w,ith a pro.. priety which did her honour, she steadily refused to accede to the urgent wishes of her lover. Daring the initeral thus caused, ans event occurred, which, if it really induiced the defendant to break off' the match, ought, after his declarations of dlisinterested attachment, to cover him witlh confusion. Thie father of the plaintiff had em- barked thie whole of his property in the inn whichi he left to his son; the concern did not prosper; GEorge NlVharton becamie involved; and in Novembtr it became known to old Mr. Wharton that he had no hope of overcoming the difficulties by whiiab he was surrounded. His ruin necessarily involved that of his fatber, nad included, indeed, all the family, except thosa uf the sons who had established themselves in trade, or had procured situations of credit in London. This was, in the moet candlid manner, disclosed to the defendant; lent he vowed the change of fortune would ma'ke no difference ; andi that the object of his regard was become e.ven more dear to htim now thiat she was thrown more exclusively on his pro- tection. This disinterested language was not, however, to coatinue; for in January of the present year, whether influenced by the cold. blooded suggestions of othiers, or by the unprincipled suggestions of is wn ear, h tok masues orperemptorily breakzing offthe matc. Te plintff hrsef deplyattached to this yourg titan, hadalradyfel bitery te cang inhe r condition ; she had im.. portnedhim to et hr kow te wrst;"1 and had, from a feel- ing f dliccy,eve beged hattheconexioni might be abandion. ed, hichit ws rmourd th defndat now intended to bring in ai fhis own perfidly. How Iittle she was pirepared to resign him, Woul too clearly appear from the manner in whichi she received the nws. Wihen hiis intention was made known toher, shie sunk- down senseless : in that state she was conveyed to bed,where shie remainedl far fotniht xtreelyillat ime ravng,uncnscousof thing passig arund er; nd een tothishourher ealt wasseriousfyr affeted,and er wole rameshakn. hat excuse, it would. ha askd, id he efedan ofer or ondctwhich produced these la-. mentable consequences P The pretence once set up was, that the friends of Mliss Wharton had made a promise to providle for her outfit, wh-ich they were now unable to keep. It was obvious that .this was a mere pretext; that to old Mlr. Lewis, wealthy as he was, the sumn of 2001., wlIich the outfit would cost, would be almost a matter of intlifference. But suppose it otherwise; supp-osing that this paltry sumi was to he incorporated into the engagtement as par- of the consideration.-." a cetain sumn, to wtt, 2001.," as the lawyer would plead it--then thie excuse wass aestroyead by the con- duct of the brothers, who resolved cst whlat it would, that -the money should be procured, and cwho actually themselves came forwardl and made a forinal tender of their own services to raise it, and denmanded f'rom Lewvis the performance of his solemn vows. But when this generous offer was mnade, it was nositively re- jected both by father and son, who declared that if Mliss Wharton had 50,0001. it would be of no avail. It would be proved, that after the change of circumstances became k-nown, the defendant continued tol address the plaintiff in the language of vehement and strong aifec- tiort. In one letter of the 26th of November. he said, " WhY will Kou ask me if I wvill leave you ? No! I never will, whatever miay iappen. Having your love, I mast be anupported, and finailly tri. uinph." In another letter of the 18th of December, only two dlays [before George WVharton appeared in the Gazette, he repeatedlthlese assurances, and spoke in san 'ice termis of the promotion which he hoped to obtain, and which sVe would share; and yet, -after all this, he deserted her and left her to the most deplorable wretchednese,with- out even the decentappearanceof'cotsppnnctionor sorrow! Whatdlefence couli he makle now to her demand of such poor com ensation as a, ver- ilict for ample damages would give ? Ifh .hu' now atttemPt to blacken her character-if, after having, God knew ! done her misi- chief enougb. he chose to add to her sufferings this atny-if he now sougt todefme hr whse eacehebad dlestroyed, whose healtit he hd Inure, whse vrfrasonhe ad shaken), and if-his attempt shold ~. itmut) e sgnllydeeatd,then ought they to add larel totht erdctwhih he coldoterwise return. he (Mr. Brouham cold carcly elive he umour he had heard, that anr- attck as o h fonde onan tteptmade by thne plaitiff to establish herself in business as a miie at Oxford-.an ateit4 s~t o which she had been urged by t'he most bonourable muttv a~n which she had prosecuted with the utmost rectitude; forsuely it was not now to besaid theta woman,by seeking toobtain aliv,elihood, and to assist a sinking family by honest industr, tdisplayed nay want of delicacy and virtue. Certan he wast that by each a couars she had not diminished, but added to her clarm for the esteem and compassion of' the good ; and if nothing could be adduced against. her but this endeavour, and that anonymous slander whicht met with instant and triumphant refut'ation, he trustedl the jury would, gsivesch daimages as would mark - their sense of her sAru~leg,-und the Ldefendant's behavour, in a case which was as much calculated tco excite pity on the one hand, and reprobation on the other, as any within the limits of his experience. MVr. Henrv Whiarton.-I am the bi-other of the plaintiffl and-a clerk in the banlzing-hoase of lilessrs. Glyn and Co., arid residd at W.alworth. I n JuiT6 last MVr. Lewis, introduced by Alr. Hod&sszi, camne to spy house, and drault tca. A party was m~dde to VSauiiiall, when my sister' went, accomnpa~nied by imy wife - 8and liii. Lewis.- After this a party was made for Fairfop-fair, when my sister 2an Mir. Lewis went:t and afterwards I accompanied them with others,. againo to Vasexhall. I asked Mlr. Flodgo tosad (~father to my chl;I believe Mlr. Lewis offered himeself ; he stoodl gdfa,ther, anid the child was haptised Amelia Lewis. About two daOys after, this party, he came to me. and said he was so aeriouslT Slmittep witht my sister, he wished to shake her an oafr. I told him then I did not know whether she wouild-have any fortune, certAinly gone till her father's death. He sad fortune was niot-his object if she would go outtwith him. I told hitia a young gentleman situated as he was should have a wife with 5,0001. at least, and it wouald be miorefor the peace of bothparties ifbe would not entermayb-ouse ni,ain. He said fortune wasnot hiaobject; he was very miiserable; and vwertaway. I neyer expected tosee him again. HIecalled on nethe next day; said hie was very happy'atbeing accepted b,ysy sister; and we shookhbaads. I told him he ros t writ'e to my father for his approbation- Aft.r this, he continued to visit at my hobise, where the plaintiff wlas then visitin.g. Old Mr. Lewis then carried on business as a hosier andi glover, in Castle.street, Leicester..square ;, -but I understand he hasR now retired. On Wedesday In the niext week, I called on oldi Mr. Lewis, but his son wasnot there.I supoed the nextitight in Cnstlc4 street, WVit'h old M3r. Lewis,f: tbl p -esence of bis son, when usc conversation -related to IThemarrage. I told old Mr. Lewbiwy alsti-, wosslal have no0 f.ta,r'u ;t; -.~ij he hoped, as tinCjy S&:.- fendi 'Of efeh other, they would be cOmnfort2ble, he couldl do nio mar fo hs sn tllhisdeah.The father and mother of the d.c. fendant invited the alantiff and mny wife and sister to dine on the following Sunday. In consequence of' the receipt of ar anonymous letter, we did not go. in Thuirsda,yor Friday,lIsaw the defendlant "on the'subjeotof'thisl'etetr. Hcpresentedlme with thieletter;lIsaid it was all falsehood ,offered him every possible reference ; anid tolcl him ifhe wa Snot satjsisdi-i th e match should be broken oft: I referred himnto the gelitleman whose naine was mentioned, and sawv him the nrext day. He then said he was perfectly satisfied of the innocerre of my sister. 1n consequenr- of that letter, mny father came to town, and he aud.i saw old 1Mr. Lewiis respecting it aboutit aweek after, but the defend- ant was not presenit. WVe stayed to suipper. The engagement Pro- ceeded aa before. WVe dined, by invitation, at Lewis's on the Wled- nesday, and miy sister Amnelia and the defendlant were of the party. lily sister was treated as the intendedl wife of the san by the father and mother-very kindly indeed. A party wvas miade to visit a1 dir. Dlossard the next day, at Bromley,jin whiich m-y sister was included. 3ir. Mossard has beeii a pastry..cook, in the Strand, and niow lives on hia fortune. Mqy brothier Geor e thlen k-ept thc King's Armis, at ilaidenhead-bridges The defenTant ViSited my sister dlaily, till November, when~ she went to Maidenbead. Earlyv in Novembcr, George's affairs became embarrassed, anid I saw the defendant to ex- plain them. I told hirn,perliaps itwoui(ld e better fnrthieconinexion to go no further. Hie several times4 replied, nothting shiould in.. disco him to break it ofl'. iixy brother wvas in the Gazette of the 20th of December. He often spoke of'my sister's outfit; andi said he would even mortgage his pay to raise the money. I told himt the famili~ would never submit to this. I was entitled in five year tomywi's fortune, and if his father would lend 2001., 1 would pay 5 per cent, on it in the mean time, andi then the principal. He seemed extremely pleased, and said he would go to Ihis father directly. On the 19th of January,!I saw Iiim at hiis fathier's, in presence of my brother George anid Mr. and Mrs. Lewis. I had called withi a letter from my) faither to demand the caiuse of the defendant's breaking with mny aister. Old Mr. Lewis read tile letter in so cool and callous a manner that I was exasperated, and hardly knew what I said. f told old Ml-r. Lewig I would horsewhip him or his son, if I met h4im. He said he w6uld take me to Bow-street. The defendant was sent for, and came. Hej placedI himself' before the fire. I was too much affected to speak. AMybrother George said-" lam cooler thanimy brother; if the outfit is raisedi, will you marry my sister, as that seems the only obstacle ?" The defendant read the letter, and said, " After what has passed, I will not mnarry her." MVy sister was with moe several months thjis summer for her health ; she is new at IVar- borough with my father. I should say old M',rs. Lewis, with tears in her eyes, told me she hoped the outfit wvoald be raised, for shle never saw a young lady she shiould like so well for a daughter. Mlv sister liasa been extremiely ill; she declared if she had 50,0001., sh~e would lay At at his ficer,attd marey him. Cross-ekamined by Mir. SCARLETT.-I am not to pay the at- torneY in this cause ; my sister only is responsible. In the first con-. versation I had with the defendant, I may have saidl my father was out of bussiniess, and lived on hiis means. I said my father had given Security for me or 1,0001. toGlyrs anid Co. ; he would give no fortune til his clm.'Vbut she was the favourite. I did not tell oldhMr. Lewis she hadfieverliMn absent from home except at watering-places with her fit. ther. Old MVr. Lewis told me he had laid out 8001. oni his soil's outfit, and he coald do no more for him till his death ' but I believe he s;aid his property would beequally divided among iiaschildiren. AMy sister's solicitor hias, I believe, the anonymous Ittter. It was given to myefther by Mlr. Lewis), with tin expression of entire Baitisfaetion at its4 fale0od, andhse would give 501. to discover thei author. I swrear I did not intentionally disguise miy sister's residence at Oxtbrd- that I swear. [A letter was put into the witness's hand, whicha he admitted to be his hand-writing. After reading it, he still swore he did not intentionall disguise his sister's residence at Oxford. The'lletter,which was a(slet wards read in evidence, was written on the receipt of the anonymous communication, andl was to the followinr effect :~-1t Sir .-.In reply to your note, I beg to assure you that. tid the imnputatio'ns cast en may sister's character fs explained away to your entire satisifarction,J shiall endeavour toprevenit any intercourse, ..should your son still be determined; and then, and not till then, shall l71attempt to justify myself for wi'thholding from you my sister's haingI residea at Oxford, ag-ilist, I regret to say, the positive com- ansof my fathier to dom so." The witness being asked to explain this lasit sentence, said he could not explain it ;land proceeded so say, in answver to Mlr. Scarlett's questions, as follows :-." I do not recollect renreseneing that my sis- ter's residenceePt Oxford was in consequenceof the death of her mo- thier, and she went to residle there writh sn eldlerly lady. I swear I never said so. Old MVr. Lewis askcd if my sister had ever been a bar-maid ? I said, "1 No." After all the explanations given, the intercourse was renewed. Mly sister is 25 or 28 I am not certain whiclh. She is younger than I. I believe I1am 29. 1 always; under- stood Mfr. liewis was 22 or 23. Mly sister is always conisidered very good.lookijag.it is not for me to say she is handsome. I told the defendant that my father had failed, and I feared it would involve my brother. I cannot say how long my sister lived at Oxford. I visi ted her twice there. Re.examined.-..I- was taxed by old AMr. Liewis with omitting to mnention my sister's residence at Oxford, and I think I said if I did omrit, it, I did so from foigetfulness;- that is my impression. Mly sister lived at Oxford as a milliner. 'It was never concealed that my father had kept an inn. He had kept an inn at Bicester; no secret was made of that to my knowledge. Mly sster never, as I under. stood, was barmiaid at MNaidenfhcad. No aUlusion was afterwards made to the anonymous letter that I remeinber. Mlr. Geo ,e Wharton, examined bv MNr. BantoUGsiAs.-I kept the inn at 11aidenhead -bridge. I first saw the defendant at moy bro. -ther's, in London, in comtaly withMy sister. He afterWard.R, in September, spent three wee s at my housewhenimyvsister was there, andlafterwards was there for nearly three week,s. They werethien on the footing of persons engaged to miarry. He several times proposed to me that they should be p-dvately m-arried. I told him I would never suffer such a thing under niy roof, nor, if I could hielp it, any w'here rise. Hie could not bear the delay whichi his friends propos- eel in order to prevent anmy family increasing the expense of the pas- sage. She was much agitated by these proposals and sutffebred in health. She lived in the hou'se merely as my sister. I saw her a few days after the match was broken off; slite was lying ini bed in a state of great sufferirg anid sorrow. Slite had thien recovered her senses; but her mind was at times wandering. I saw her about two mostthsi ago;, she was theni recovering, but had been very unwell. Iwa present at the Interview of the 19th of January, and beard the C(InVers2tion between my brother and Mlr. Lewis son. I asked the defendant if he would marry her if the outfit was pro- vided for, as that seemed, the groat object ; he said, after wheat lhad passed, ho would not. I told him lie was a great scountdrel. [-e read thie letter of my father in an off-baLnd way, as if it liad been a bill of the play, threw ittdlown, and turned to the fire with all the coolness imagtnable. I tod hm my sister was then out of her senses,, that nothing woul(I relieve h-er but his presence, and if he had a spark of feeling or humanity he woulti go dtown. He received it witlh perfect unconcern ;--I he was sorry for it, but could not b elp it." Cross.examined by Alr. SCARLETT...Upon my oath, the defen- d9ant did not say,, " after tie several deceptions uised, I vwill not mnarry her." Something in the argument might be said about deceptions. After my father left Bicester, whecre lite kept an inn, it was proposed that a com-position of Os. in the pound should be taken by mny father's creditors. I believe it was piartly accepted hut it was never carried into effect. Ile afterwards lived tn a cottage at Warboroughi. Whieinimyfathier left Bicester, hehad topay ofta mnortgage. Re.examined.-The composition was talked of in Mifay, 18221. The inn at Maidenbead was never a very gaod concern. It never was re- presented to my knowledge to Mlr. Lewis that my father was a wealthy nlan. The witness proved the handwriting of MVr. Lewis to several letters and a paper put into his bands. He furthier stated that whien he failed, his father was involved with him. Air. SCARLETT..He was involved before hiiim. Mlr. Williami Wharton, the plaintiff'It father, examined by AMr. ARA351M.-..In 1823 I was living at WVarborough, near Shillingford, in Oxfordshire. I came up to town in Novem-ber or December, 1823, and saw the defendant MVr. Lewis. I went to old Mvr. Lewis's house with my soni Henry. Old Mfr. Lewis told me -he had received an anonymrous letter.; hie had left his son to satisfy himself of its fals-ehood: he did not think much of that. Ott rthe Wednesday following I dined at Mr. Lewis's with mny daughter and his family. I hail said the outflt shiould be provided, at that time having no idea my son George wvas in difficulties. iMy dau hter afterwards came home to me, and Mlr. Lewis,jun.. came after ler.- lie and I wentito AMaidenhead.bridge together, and I told him the whole of my son's affairs: he said they shouild makce no dlifference. I told hiim I fearced I could not do what I had pronmised; he said that did not signify; if I could no)t obtain the money, ho would. I told him if my daughter came to Loindon, she m,ut e her own living. He said, "i that should never be--he wol ahrcontribute to hier support himself." I told hint, "thati 1 should never suff'er." Mly daugliter was with me in January. 1 communicated to her that the snatch was broken off-she went into a fit-she was very ill. WeP comforted her by saying things migltt not be so bad, but she was very ill. :A fewv days after came another letter; she clropped into a chair cold and stiff; for two hours shd rematined senseless. She was carried to bed; theie she was delirious-raving mad-without any recollection or sense of people about her. She continued so for a week or ten days ; I sat up it ler sicwas distracted, and only kept in bed by force. Shetbrw ersleon her knee to me as old Mlr. Lewis; she never knew me, nor anone. Slite was very weak; her head is even now mueh effected at times:- at times eheis better. [The withess seem. ed much affected in giving tite latter part of his evidence.j Cross-examined bvyAly. SCARLETT....I told Mlr. Lewis I was living out of biisines~ ; I couild glee my daugliter nothing now; she Would s~Il7e anay tlinrg I had with the others at the time of my det. Tere qas a mortgage of 1,0001. on my house at Biceater, and arretS-s of interest amounting altogether to about 1,4001. Mly son George was to ailow me an annuity now my eons take care that I want for nothing. I think I 'had more than thirty shillings a-week. Warhorought is ten miles from Oxford.I have an unfortunate son, James, whio is a scandal to us, atild wan. ders about thie country. 'He was committedI as a vagrant in July, LeIs leftave hadi no pros pect of marrying my daughter since MVr. Loi ether. I never threatened to send letters to India to ruin the defendant; but MY son-in-law said, he would write to a friend of his thiere, anid let him know what the defendant was. ily daugh. ter spentfive-weeks at dir. White's, after dir. Lewis left her, and there was introduced to a Clergyman. I think I saild she deserved was pro;utse n -soultd make her an ofler, he was attentive to her; but sheIshunned him, I am sure she could not bear it, site would not walk with him. This was about Alarch last. On mty oath, I neyer said-the match was broken off because I refused my consent, and that r had found Air. Lewis was a married man. ylv daughter nevcr said so in my hearing. Re.examined.-I have lieard since the match was broken off, that Lewis had been married; btit not before. Mly son George was to allow me 1001. a-year in consideration of my leaving the King's Anns to him. It had cost me 1,000h or more to go into that inn ; that 1 left to George. ffe had no property there but what I left himn. DIr. and Mlrs. White invited my daughter, thinking it would be a rdlief to hermaitd. Air, Hern Wharton recaRled.-I commfunicated to old 'Ar. Lewis thatI ilad a brother who was a scamp and a disgrace to Ctie family. I told him soatmn first interview. Cross-examinedby Mr. aCARLxTT.-I certainly did tell Air. Lewis the situation of my brother. I often talked about him to the defendant, and he offered to get him into the African or 4merican service, whore lie would be disposed of in a very short time. The vow or contract pluded to by MIr. Brougham was [lien read. It was on a small piece of paver, bore date eptember 25, 1823, annd was as follows t-" FWe, WiDliam George frederic Lewis and Amelia Ann W[sarton, most solemnly promise to be true to each other for life, and nothingp but death shall part us;" anti was signed by botr the lovers. Five letters from the defendant to the plaintiff were then read, the earliest of the 19th of September, 1823, and the ., I .t of' Janluary 6, U14. Thley contained the exprem~iunis alluded to by r.1 Brougbam, and were othierwise in tho usual style of ama. trfoy.Much lauglhter was excited by thec following words:- I o)dgive any thing for a kiss! How I will give it you when we meet!" and by the insertion of agreat number of crosse, meant to be symbolitnl of kisses. This waa the plaintiff's case. AMr. SCARLETT addressed the jury for thie defendant. If the case of the plaintiff had excited those tender senisibilities whiche such cages were generally supposed to awaken, he regretted that it fell to hisi lot to dlistuirb the feelings so excited, and to s.iow that they were, in this instance, founded on delusion. That case had certaini vacan. 'cies which had scarcely escaped their observationis, and whichl he should fill up so as in no smrall dlegree to alter the aspect of the whiole. Trme there had been a promise made trine it lhad been broken ;buit the defendant woulld not be liable to any acetion upon it if it should appear to bo obtained by gross deception, concealment, afid fraud. Old Alr. Lewis was the fathier of si-x chtildren ; in a Si- tuation of respectability but not of affluenice; who had fitted ouit this son for India at an expense which lie could hardly afford in justice to the rest of his family. The young nian, who was then only an ensign1, returned under a certificate of ill liealtlh, whbich entitled him to an allowance of 301., in additioii to hli$ pay of 711., during hiis con- tiniuanice in England. He had since been raised to the rank of lieu,- ten ant; but the pay attached to that situation was scarcely 101.ayear; so that the lady lhad not lost any splendi provisioni. Shie was, tndoubtedlly a veryT attractive, nay very beautiful. girl, and being, ats the seque perhaps wouldI show, not quite inexperienced in wvinning heartsi, madle a conquest' of~ the young soldier at Vauxliall or Fairlopi-fair, and soon compelled him to suirrender. The brother represented that his father had retired from business; that hie had set up his brothrer in a respectable iinn; and that though he could give hiis daughter no fortutne now. yet she would share with his children whiat he mnight die posseseed of, anad mnigh-t possibly have a larger partion, as she was a favourite child. At the time this representation was made, it was: kniown that Mlr. Wharton had offered a composition wvith hiis creditors, whiceh some bad accepted and others refuised, anid was entirely supportedl by his children; so that, at htis death, he touild have niothing to leave- But lie (lid not rely on this misrepresenitation for hiis defence; he should carry the case miuch further. Old Mr. Lewis saw thse connexion withi deep regret; hie f'elt its imprudence; but as he saw that hais son's atf. fections were engaiged, lie dleterrnined not to offer a vain opposition, provided the character a-nd family of the lady shouild prove without serious objection. Those points,' always important, derived addi- tional urgency from the situation of his son. It was kuown to.all who were conversant with society in India, that if an officer carried a Wife thiither whose reputation was blemishedl, or who had filled a low situation in liffe, an attempt to introduce her to society would Ibe his utter ruini. Mtr. Lewis, however, was assured that Mliss W.harton had been educated nuider her father's eye; that slhe hiad never been in thec situation of bar-maid which would exclutde her from aociety in India; and that she had never qutitted the paternal ro,except to visit watering-placee withi her father, or to pass some tim with her brothers. IMr. Lewis confided in these represents- tin, and agreed to put the best face on tie matter, and receive her as hisitended daughter. Before her visit,.however, the anonymous letr was received, wliich the defendant lhad beeni requiredl by no- tic to prodluce, and which in substancee stated, that Miiss Wharton ha comne to town to procure a situation as bar-mnaid ; that slie had been in partnershiip at OxfordI with a woman who was now in keeping, wvhere she had conducted herself imprudently ; and that she had beeni a shop-girl in \Vales. As no nian ought to act on such a communication without affording to the party accused an op ortu- nity of repelling it, Mlr. Lewis slhowed thec letter to AiIr. 1-Ienry Wharton, and wrote to him concerning It. Mlr. Whlarton said it was all false, except the. residence at Oxford : and though he now stated that he oinittetl that merely from error, then wrote, as thley had heard, in very different terms. He furthier explained, that his sisiter lhad gone to Oxford on her mothier's deathi, wvith an elderly ladly, and that there was really nothiing at all in the af'fair. By assurances like these, t'iie suspicions of Mr. Lewis were lulled, and lie allowedI the connexioni to proceed]. He did not change Isis views on the discovery of the bankrupst situation of the father; his son die) not recede when lie found Mr. Wliarton living in a poor cottage and broken in fortunes : it wats another discovery whicht sejs made after the 6thl of Janiuary, when thie last letter was dated, Whlich induced both to declare that else mnarriage should not takce place, if the lady had.50,0001. insteadlof nothing. They found that anaclvertisement had been inserted in 7lte Timies of the 27th of Mlay previous, ad- dressed " To hotel and tavern keepers," in whiclh the advertisar souight the situattion of bar-maid,and announceed that she liad for four years had thernanagementofaninn on theWIestern road,spoke French, and could give unideniable referenc-es. Thev ascertained that this acivertiserment had been answeredi by Mlr. Illivart, the miaster of itn hotel in Brook--street; and that the advertiser was no other than Mliss NVharton, whio came withi her brother Heniry to ensure the place She did remain one day; but Mr. Mlivart thought he perceived that her eves were more alert thian hier hands ; aud hiaving hipiself a (laughter or niece at homne, declined availing himself of hier services. But this was not all ; they also dliscovered that she lhad beets a imui- liner at "Oxrd, not under tlhe protection of ani elderly ladly, bitt in partne~r.hip with a showy girl of' hier own age ; tliot she had theire been accustomedi to flirt with guwusumen ; and had atttracted the no- tice of the proctors. After this, was it possible for Mr. Lewis to think of the connexion ? If it were kniown in India that she hiad been a bar-maid, or that she had laughed with gownssmen at Oxfordl, her exclusion from society and her hus,band's ruin would be certain. As to hier alleged grief arid mnadness, Mir. Whiite, a neighbour of hier father, would prove that she was able a ~ay or two after the disap- pointment to dine and sing at his hiouse, and to captivate his visiters by her sprighitly manniers. This was his case; anti if lie proved it, or half of it, CIse Jury wvould see that the defendlant hiail beets the victim of delusion-thlat he was fully justified in brealking off the usatch, anid that he was enititled to a verdict in his favour. Mlr. Thomas Hodson said-I introduced the defendant to MlissR Wharton, and accomipanied them to Vauxhall and Fairlopi-fair. I went by desgire of Mlr. Lewis, to Henry Wharton, to liiferm him Of the attachinent of the defendant, and to niake inquiries. He told me that the plaintiff was livingwitli her father, who had'retired on Isis for,tune, and that she hadlnotq-aitted his roof, excep to gowith iim to watering places. She wotuld lhave no foretitne till Ter father's death ; shiewas the darling child, and if there was any preference shown, sls.e would have it. Hfealso stated, that his father was security forhbins to Glyn's houlse for 1,0001. I stated to him, that Etissigu Lewis biad no fortune. Mliss Wharton afterwards told me, ths~t Lewis had applied to her fathier oni the subject. of the marriage. In Janua-ry, a-fter the matchi was broken off, I saw Mliss Wlharton at WVarbo- soughi ; when slie told mec she totally acquittedl Ensign Lewis of any blame-hber father was abusing hinm-she said lie was not to blamie. Cross.examlned.....I marriect Mlr. Lewis's sister on thie 7th of Sep- teinber last. Mir. Lewis, sen., the defendant's fatlser, said-'In June, 1823, I first learnsed that rn~' son was attachied to Mliss Wharton. lie was then an ensign in a Madras regiment, and his pay 711. a yearT. tHe came to England on accouint of' sickneas, -and was allowed 301. a year mnore. I was; then in trade, but have since retired on account of ill- health. M11r. H enry W1harton waited on me, and informned me of the proposal ofmarriage made to his sister. 1 remonstrated with him on thle imprudencee of the match ; I repeate4 the circumistances, and toldl him my son hiad already cost melI 0001., and nsust expect no msore from inc so long as he lived. I aZed, " Perhaps you are not aware of the expense of'sending a lady out to Indlia; it will cost near 4001."1 Je said, "1 That of course shgall be done for her." I asked how she hadl been educatedl P fle said she liad received a most liberal eduu-tion-she was a perfect lady-site would be the Quieen of India. (A laugh.) He stated that his fatlser had retired from business, and was living on hIds property at hiis dleath she would share withl the rest, or if there were aiiy differ- ence, would have mo,1re. " But," he saict " there is onie difficulty we shall have to overcome-.she has never been away from her fether's roof, and it would break hisheart to p art with her.- Even nowv he wished to lhave her home with him." Perhaps, said I, tile lady herself' will object to go." " 0 n1o;" said lie, "1 she will go all over the world with your son." " They must be desperately in love," I replied, " after three Aveeks' acquainitance." Trwo dave afterwards, I receivedl an anonymous letter. Mir. B'iIoIGUA31 produced the letter, which was handed in, anld afterwards read to the follow-itig effect: " I thiink it my duty, as one who sometimies visits at your house, to acquaint you with the character of Amelia WVhai-ots. She was fonnerly a milliner at Oxford, in partisership with a lady who is miuw in keepingr; and they became bankrupts in consequence of their in- famous ~onduct with the Oxanians. She came to town only to get a situation as bar-maid, hot having sixpence; and lier brothers, who are an mnuch delighted vwith the matchi, can do nothing for her, one of them being a shiopmuan, another a town- traveller, and the brothier with whom she is staying, at banker's clerk with three childreni." The letter wass signed, " Your well-wisher," and wvas followed by a posscrpt,'~Se ws once a shop girl its Wales, and igs-ny thing butwha sh ouht ubeto come into youir family." The itnes net proved the receipt of Hlenry WVhartoni's ltter, arayrfre to, and proceeded.-1 had never at that timaeher of an Wharton. Henry WhVjarton told me thle whole contents of the letter were false, except that she liad resided at Oxford. I askedI how lise camne to suppress that ? lie said it was from pride; shec was plaeed at Oxford under a lady by way of protection, on the deathi of her miother. He said either an elherly persoii or a sedate person, I do not kniow which. He then told me his father was coming in person to explain the 'eliode. The father came. He said every part of the letter was' failse, except that she had been at Oxford. H-enry 'Wharton said, "1 Ols,the Oxford business is of no consequence ;" the father said very little. I stated to bothi, that if any part of' the. letter were true, or her contduct at Oxford hat) been inceorrect, my tots could never take her to India as his wife; arid that if'shec had been a shop-girl in WVales, or a barmaid, it would be impossible to take hier. Mfr. Henry Whiarton said, "-Cer- tainly." Theysaid they thought they knew tlsen,uthor, Mr. Wharton, Sen., said one of' hisr sonsj was a bad character. That was the firsit time it was mentioned. I afterwards m-ade inquiries about this young lady connected withi an aelvertisement. I was present at else inter- view when tlse matter was broker, off. I said I would send for i-y son, and I did so. They psoduced a letter, and said, "1 Yoen see hiow ill our sister is ; I amn not sure if she is 'alive now." Hienry WVhar- ton asked if lie would marry Isis sister?P The defendant replied,"1 I will not after the deceptions you have used." I added, "1 if yoei could give hier .5,0001. my soni shouild not marry her." It was nht on account of the outfit that the match was broken ofr. Ilenry WVhartoni sail he wouild send to Indeia and ruin my son if he did not marry hiis sister. le had proposedtornrise the money bymy leiiding it onhi bond:~ my-sumstoldbuhmle was sure [wouldanot. "Then."1 blU P.C ''umtc uth broken off." I alsos,,w another bro. ther of the plaintiff; Francis Wharton. Cross-examined by Mir. BaounreA s.-I did not refuisemy con- sent at frst, but gave reasons and caulatidns against it. I did not withihioltI my consenit. Mly son made inquiries of the gentleman a'1- ludeud to in the anonymous letter, and at the moment was satisfied that the lady referred to was not in keeping. Mrs.., Lewis was present when my son spoke of deceptions. mr. BROUGIfnAs.-She is here, I suppose? IMIr. Leivis.-No; she is not. Alr. BaoUGHAm.-But she is in town. M'dr. Lewis.-I did not thitik it necessary to bring lier; she is at Kensinzton. * Mr. BRoUGsAss.-There being no stages from Kensington, you did not think it necessary to bring her. I hope shIe is wall. lr. l,ewis.-I am very much obliged, Mr. Brouglsbm, by your kitsd inquiries ; she is very well. (A laugh.) The witness proceeded.-I said nothing about " deceptions" till that day ; I gave a different reason for breaking off the match. I had no personal intet-view before, but I wrote two letters on the 9th of January, lwhichl were produced and admitted.] I am not to pay the costs of this action. Re-examnined.-When I wrote thic letters, I knerv the full extent of the deception practised on rise. John llalliday.-I ani larshal of the University of Oxford. I recelect Mliss Wh3atton and another lady lIiving in Blne Boar-lane, ithtcity., dui office i". to attend tbe Vic Chasl' o nnI tepI tort on an evening. The house is a small honis; there were corn p asints egalns tne honse. lt is myduty to keep loose girLs out of the way of yOung nioen. Theae iadiestwee khow to thte fseroctr about one or two terms. The other lhdy was ab6i tl4 saW arton's age. They appeared'in the public wa i pd streets very-much dressed, and were much talked of by the yguing gentlemen. I thbl:k I have seen them walking with the young amsn. Ithinkihave heard them called " the gay miMliners." I thinlk they ladge4 befere in St, Giles's. I never saw any young men go'into tlae house- butI have seen gownsmen negr it. I hare seert them lau nat-the youingmen, and the young mei nod at them. Both were ra,.hir handsome. Pea. ple in the neighbouthood coTnplained td mne of the liouse. I never sTpoke to the girls; nor do l believe- did the proctors. The other la- ay's stather kept a public-house, and was a hairdresser in Oxford. The house looked into the-garden of one of.the canons, and was in view of the wiindows of Christchurch. The father and grand. father of the lady were both respectable. Mr. James Mivart said.-4 am the ovvher of the -hotel in Brook- street. I saw an advertisement in ee Times of the 27th of Mlay whiich I answered, and a young woman came. Her iarne was iVharton. She afterwards came with her brother Ifenry. The advertisement, to the purport mentioned by Mlr. Scarlett,was read. iUr. Iivart added-She was very desirous of being engaged. The wages were to be 201. a year. She was to attend the bar give oat toa, and do the usual busineas. She said she lIad nianaged hIr bro. ther's house at Alaidenulead, mixed liquor, and done all the situa- tion required. She came on trial for one day. She was desirous of staying; but I-obsprved a flighty manner and a love of dress more than I approved, and she went away. Herbrother came to fetch her, and I gave him to understand that I declined her services. Air. Thomac Gilbert White said-Miss Wharton dined at my laouse on the 11th of Januar ; she was not very well; she after- wards came to stay at my touse for five orisix weeks. All thie young friends who frequented mny house thought she had high spiits. She sang verv prettily. Once she asked lrs. White sf she did not observe she:wa low the dsy she dined first at our house. Airs. White said" Yes." She said I had received a letter from Mr. Lewis, breaking off the match, and my father and brother said r should niot have any nsore to do with him, ais they found he was a married man." There was a clergyman visit- ilg at my house, who paid her attentions; she was a fascinating pretty girl: I cannot say she liked him. I recollect her saying to her father " I cannot marry such a man as that."- He repfied, " You will be like the girl who went into a wood to cut a stick; she would not cut this or that, and came out without catting any-so you will trifle with yourself." I have not received her since, be. cause things have been thrown inmy face in consequence of her visit- ing me, and in consequence of the treatment I have received from a man named Jones, who is son-in-law to Whartoa. Cross-examined._l intend to prosecute Jones. I lived double three or four years in the rules of the Bench. I quarrelled some months ago with Jones. If I said Miss XVharton would have died if she had not come to our house, it was in consequence of whlat her father told mne. Re-examined.-The quarrel with Jones originated in a convarsa- tion with old MIr. Wharton. He called on me, and telling me the action would be brought into Court, said it would be necessary to subhpna me, my wife, and a Ir. Forty. I said," I hope not ; and I do not see of what use I can be." He said, I want you to prove an hindrance of marriage; for Mlr. Forty told my child that if it had not been for that fellow Lewis, ho would h.ve her himself. I replied, ' Air. Wharton, it's a lie; I know Alr. Forty would not think of it." Mfr. Forty was a farmer. In consequence of this, part]y, Jones abused me. This was the case for the defendant. Mlr. BROL'oHAM put in, by way of reply, two letters of the d^. fendant's father each bearing date 9th of January, one to the plain- tiff's father, and the other to Henry NVharton, both suggesting that as they were unable to provide the outfit, it would be better that the connexion should cease, but containing no mention of deceptions. Tbe learned Counsel proposed to put in two other letters, to isprove tele statement respecting dcceptions; but the LoneD CIrIs JUSTICE thouglht they could not be received in this stage of the cause. M enry Whaiton recalled said, I recollect theinterviewof the 18th ef January. Old iMIr. Lewls said if my sister had 50,0001., his son should not marry her. I heard nothing about deceptions. Dlr. George WVharton also positively swore, that Air. ljewis said nothing about deceptions. ilMr. SCAULETT replied on this evidence. DIr. BROTGHAeS replied on the whole case. He urged thatmuch of the defendant's evidessec, even if true, applied not to the plain- tiff, but to her friends; that the advertisement, though unitrue In ternms, was not virtually calculated to mislead ; that the father really had an interest in the inn, whichi might have justified the inti- mations as to his forturne; that the charge of levity at Oxford was really unsupported; and that no attempt had5 been made to justify Mr. Scarlett's insinuations as to tie condliet of Miiss Wharton at Air. ilivart's house. The learned counsel called on the Jury to say whether the evidence of the father, delivered in a manner which drew tears from other eyes than Ihis own, could be fabricatcd; to disbelieve a defessee never susggcsted till now ; and to give reparation in damages for the additional suffering which the de- fence was calculated to inflict. The LORD C1IaEF .JUSTICE chiarged the Jury, that their ver- dict inust depend on thc question-whetlher the promise of mar- rirage had been ohtained by allegation of falsehood, or wilful sup- pression of truth; as, if it was obtained by either,it was not binding. He then rend over the wliole evidence, directing them, that if they thought that false representations were made as to the father's pro. perty, or the plaintiff's situation, or her residence at Oxford, they would find for the defendant; if they thought otherwise, for the plaintiff, with jsuch reasonable damtages as the situation of the de- The uryconslte fora qarte ofan liour, and then rettirned a verdict for the plaintiff-odzamnuagrescl5a 1001. d hn eure The trial lasted till seven o'clork. COURT OF KINW'S BENCH. WPWVMTVr.- fnl WIAkTON V T.Itv-