Year: 1860

thelr aggregate weight will bear hard on TON.


TIE GHEAr BREAcH-or PxoxIsE CAsr.--It was
announced In our telegram column Of our ysstsr-
days edition, that the case Of Oarstang ~. Shaw
was decided In st. Louis on Saturday night, In
favor Of the defendant. The following. 10 Judge
Reber's charge to tho jury:


o" s.aa ~ nS.min estimating tho
the wealth of defendant and his ability to pay.
Us well a. bis rank and position In society. are
proper subjects Of consideration for tho Jury. II
the jury Rnd from tho evidence thas tho plaintiff
and defendant contracted TO marry each other,
and the defendant refused 10 perform such con-
ant IL necessary. At the instance Of the plaintiff,
tho jury are instructed that to maintain the 40
tion Of tho plaintiff, IL 10 necessary that they
should find mutual promise to marry bstwsen
plaintiifand defendant; but 1t 10 not necossary
that either promise should be expressed that 10,
that nny witness should hear the contract made;
on the contrary, the promise Of each to tho other
may be inferred from circumstances, nor 10 II ne.
cessary to maintain the action that the promise
on either side should be made In writing to mako
il valid and binding on both. And whether
thore was mutual promise to marry between
plaintiff and defendant is question for the jury,
to bo determined by them from oil the proof and
circumstances shown In evidence. II the jury
find from the evidence for the plaintiff they ought
to assess her damages. And in determining the
amount. they ought to find such In their
judgement, undor nil the circumstances Of the
case, may be proper indemnity to her for the
injury she has suffered IN hor feelings affections,
and wounded pride, as well as the loss Of mar
rase; and il the defendant has attacked tho char
acter of the plaintiff and failed to sustain such
attack, 1t is proper subject Of consideration az
gravating the damages.


On Beha.f Of Defendant. nt.-Beiors The Jury can
find for the plaintiff upon the cause of action set
out in tho petition, they must believe from the
evidence that defendant actually promised 10 mar
ry plaintiff and that she. Ia earnest, accepted
snid promise, and that plaintiff actually and In
earnest. promised to marry defendant. and that
ho actually received her said promise In earnest.
And unlets the jury believe such mutual pro-
misses were 30 given and received, they will And
for defendant on plaintiffs cause of action; and In
such case, IL makes no difference whether defend
aut had sexual intercourse with plaintiff or not,
or whether che visited defendants house, or
whether he visited her for suoh purpose or not.
If the Jury find for the plaintiff, they will deduct
from the amount that they may find In her favor,
the aggregate sum Of the two promissory notes
mentioned In the defendants apswer, with inter
est unless the jury should fnd for tho plaintiff
less sum than the said uotes and interest, IN
which case the jury will find for tho defendant tho
difference between tho damages they may assess in
favor ofthc plaintiff, and the amount Of the said
notes and interest. That unless the jury are satis
fed from the evidence in the cause, thai defendant
promised 10 marry the plaintiff. rs stated in her
petition they should find for the defendant.