Aglionby versus isabella TOWERSON WInow error in Carlisle assumpsit Danv ab p  the plaintiff declare that November car there be a discourse between the  plaintiff and defendant of and concern a marriage to he have between one  Christopher Richmond Esq his sister son and one Isabel Reynoldson niece of the  defendant upon which the say defendant then and there in consideration that  the plaintiff at the special instance and request of the defendant will  endeavour and labour to persuade the say Christopher Richmond to marry the say  Isabel Reynoldson do promise that she will pay the plaintiff if the say  marriage shall take effect the plaintiff in fait say that be Dec car and  diverse other day and time at the instance and request of the defendant  omnibus manner who to be able attempt to be carefully elaborated to advise prd  Christophorum to marry the say Isabel Reynoldson and that afterward videlicet  I July car the say marriage take effect and yet the defendant have not pay he  the though ult September last pass she be thereunto require the defendant  plead non assumpsit and verdict and judgement for the plaintiff and damage and  the general error assign but the error insist on be that the plaintiff do not  show how be do endeavour to persuade and so uncertain for he say only omnibus  manner who to be able but I conceive it be good enough for we shall not  presume he do prevaricate uneven non be prsumendum if he shall set forth his  speech be make either in commendation of the young woman or advantage of a  marry life c the record will be too long and perhaps we can not be competent  judge of it mich in b r barber versus clerk assumpsit in consideration the  plaintiff will renounce a executorship the defendant will pay c the plaintiff  aver quod renunciavit and good and yet the person before who the renunciation  be may not be competent mich you b r baker versus smith assumpsit the  plaintiff be a virgin have be prevail with to make a contract with the  defendant and afterward the defendant be desirous to be free and thereupon the  defendant Raymond sir t in consideration that the plaintiff will disonerare  England will disengage he of his promise he promise to pay her and she allege  that she do disengage he and adjudge good without show how she do disengage he  and the whole court seem to agree that the declaration in principal be good  but they persuade the plaintiff to go to a new trial and he be prevail with  because the damage be great for so small a matter