The Times, Saturday, Sep 08, 1821; pg. 3; Issue 11346; col C SUMMER ASSIZES. ---------------- CARLISLE, SEPTEMBER 3. CRIM. CON. - RENWICK V. MATTHEWS. This was an action for damages by the plaintiff, a hairdresser in Carlisle, against the defendant, an aged gentleman in the same place, for having deprived the plaintiff of the affection and comfort of a faithful wife. Scarcely had the abrupt termination of the breach of promise in one court been known, when the crim. con. was announced for the other. The ladies at the same time were cruelly dragged out from the other court, through an opposing torrent of the rougher sex rushing in with unbounded curiosity. Scarcely had every corner and passage been packed, when Mr. BROUGHAM rose, and said it was agreed to take a verdict for the plaintiff - Damages 40s. We never saw an assize court so rapidly and excessively crowded, and we seldom witnessed disappointment so complete, so sudden, and yet so reluctantly believed. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There's nothing new under the sun... Sensationalism existed in the 1820s as much as today! I found the following explanation about "crim. con." on the website of the Berkshire Family History Society http://www.berksfhs.org.uk/journal/Dec1999/dec1999SexAndScandalInNorthBerkshire.htm : Until the 1857 Divorce Act divorce and separation was confined to the rich elite. If a husband wished to divorce his wife he would need to go through a complicated series of procedures with no certainty of the outcome. In the early nineteenth century divorce involved three separate lawsuits: one in an ecclesiastical court, for separation from the adulterous wife, one in a civil court against the wife's lover for damages for criminal conversation, or crim con, and a private parliamentary bill. Crim con involved a writ of trespass, the principle being that by using the body of the wife, the alleged adulterer had damaged the property of her husband. Petra