APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 287 



very early period. Mr. Bmn- 

 don, about five or six yeacs ago, 

 being about to leave the country, 

 a mutual agreement, regulai'ly 

 signed and attested, was drawn 

 up, in which each party cove- 

 nanted to pay the other the sum 

 of" 500/. in case of a refusal on 

 either side to enter into the mar- 

 riage contract when called upon. 

 During the absence of Mr. Bran- 

 don several letters of a very 

 tender description passed between 

 them, and no interruption was 

 expected to the completion of 

 the contract. The defendant re- 

 turned to this country, and an 

 interview took place between him 

 and the plaintiff. At this time 

 no change was perceptible in his 

 behaviour towards her, but some 

 months ago the correspondence 

 was dropped on his part. The 

 fair plaintiff sought to obtain an 

 interview, in order to insist upon 

 the fulfilment of the contract, and 

 at length " caught" him just as 

 he was about to proceed to the 

 country, by coach, from the 

 Three Tuns in Aldgate. She 

 was accompanied by a friend, and 

 followed him into the yard of the 

 inn; she accosted him, produced 

 a copy of the bond, and in rather 

 strong terms urged him imme- 

 diately to fulfil the engagement 

 he had entered into. He, how- 

 ever, refused to give any answer 

 at that time, and they parted. 

 The present action was the con- 

 sequence of this refusal. 



The covenant was put in, and 

 read. A letter was also produced, 

 which had been written by Miss 

 Shannon subsequent to the in- 

 terview at the Three Tuns. Tiie 

 style of this document excited 

 much mirth in the Court. It ran 



thus i-'—" I, Esther Shannon, do 

 hereby require you, Jonathan 

 Israel Brandon, forthwith to be- 

 come my husband, upon pain of 

 forfeiting the penalty of 500/., 

 being the sum mutually agreed 

 upon, &c." 



Other documents relative to 

 the case were read, and witnesses 

 called to prove the facts as re- 

 lated. ' 



Mr. Sergeant Best, for the 

 defendant, in a very short address 

 to the jury, said he knew the 

 verdict must be against his client ; 

 but he felt it his duty to state, 

 that the breach of contract on 

 his part was entirely owing to 

 losses in trade, by which he was 

 rendered incapable of supporting 

 Miss Shannon in a style befitting 

 her rank in life. Of these losses 

 the other parties were perfectly 

 aware, and he could not help 

 thinking that the present pro- 

 ceedings might have been spared. 



The jury instantly found for 

 the plaintiff, damages 500/. 



ADMIRALTY-COURT, JUNE 30. 



Ville de Varsovie. — Sir William 

 Scott. — This is a question of 

 head-money, arising from the 

 destruction of five French ships 

 in Basque- roadd in the year 1809, 

 The French fleet lay there block- 

 aded by the English squadron, 

 and it was the object of the Board 

 of Admiralty to destroy them by 

 fire-ships, or any other means that 

 would be likely to be effectual. 

 The service was performed, and 

 head-money was claimed on 

 the part of Lord Gambler 

 for the fleet. It was decreed to 

 him, but distribution of it was 

 prevented by a notice delivered to 



Lord 



