Gaskill v. Dixon.

■pJLR curiam.

The plaintiff has sued the defendant- upon a,

-l

contract of marriage — and he insists, by way of excusing himself for the non-performance, that after the contract, he dis-, covered she was a woman of impure and unchaste habits and practices, end has attempted to prove her so. If he has succeeded to the satisfaction of the jury, I ana of opinion it will form a

complete defence

for him against the action, and will not Ipe in mitigation of the damages only. She held herself up to. him as a chaste and undefiled woman. Upon

this as

a

condition,

fee contracted-r-and surely he is released from his engagement when she is found to be otherwise,, for, the condition on her part is not complied with.

The jury disbelieved the defendant’s witnesses, and found a verdict for the plaintiff, with heavy damages,, and she had judgment.