The Times, Thursday, Sep 06, 1821; pg. 3; Issue 11344; col B SUMMER ASSIZES. ------------- CARLISLE, SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 1. BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE. - THOMPSON V. BLAMIRE. [continued] Mr. SCARLETT. - I know not whether I shall be able to keep up the tone of merriment and ridicule which my learned friend very judiciously introduced into this cause. Not only are love-letters in their very nature ridiculous, but this cause is of a character which could not be mentioned to you with affected gravity. Young men of 18 or 20 are fond of writing such letters as you have heard read. The clerk, for his is an age fitted to such letters, read the letters extremely well - far better than he could read old parchment. My learned friend, Mr. BROUGHAM, said he was not skilled in amorous productions, and not much acquainted with love-letters: but if he, learned as he was, were to be deeply in love, he would have got thin upon it, but the poor defendant got fat; she never could have believed that he was in love with her. Gentlemen, what woman in the world could believe that a man loved her sincerely if he got fat in her absence? Lovers, gentlemen, pine, they don't grow fat, and I dare say she was as sleek as he. Well, and what damages will you give? You see he is a bad poet; she could not expect to be amused by his poetry. He has not a farthing of his own; what then has she lost? My learned friend, Mr. BROUGHAM, and if a counsel from his cold and phlegmatic manner of reading his brief must make the discovery, what must a young lady have made? Even Mr. BROUGHAM discovered that the letter betrayed a greater passion for the horse than the lady. Love is blind, but it is to the defects of its object, and is keen-sighted to the charms and beauties even of a crow of Egypt. Love, then, would have made the comparison which my learned friend missed, and said that Miss THOMPSON was superior to all the ladies of Carlisle. Women at a certain age are really older and discreeter than men. They know at 18 what we discover much later. Nature, that has accomplished them in all things, has given them this advantage too; and Miss THOMPSON must have said to her sister "Look at that ridiculous boy, he thinks himself in love, but he is much fonder of his horse." But what injury has she sustained? Is she pining? I dare say she is as handsome as she was before. None of the witnesses has said that she sighed, or shed a tear over the treachery of her lover. If, then, you do give a verdict for the plaintiff - in what has she suffered damage? She has lost a beggarly boy; and I verily believe her father would not have allowed the marriage without his father's consent, because without that he had nothing. It is an attempt, gentlemen, to get money for Mr. THOMPSON's family, Mr. ARMSTRONG being his landlord, and wanting his rent. But no promise has been proved on her part, no expression has appeared to have escaped her. If he had lived unmarried to the age of 70, it appears, no complaint would have been made. It was never, therefore, deemed by themselves a promise of marriage: but treated, gentlemen, with levity or with gravity, you will not think serious damages due. Mr. Justice HOLROYD summed up at considerable length, and left it to the Jury whether any promise of marriage had been seriously given and mutually agreed to. His Lordship pointed out several circumstances as against the probability of such a promise. Mr. BROUGHAM reminded his Lordship of the promise at the coursing at Barrock, and of the young man saying he did not want money. Mr. Justice HOLROYD repeated those circumstances to the Jury. The Jury, without leaving the box, considered for a few minutes, and found a verdict for the plaintiff - Damages 100L. This verdict was evidently not expected; but it gave general and high satisfaction. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ End of this article. More reporting from the assizes to follow..... Petra