SINGULAR BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

Evening Star, Issue 9830, 19 October 1895, Page 4 (Supplement)

SINGULAR BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

Mr Justice Grantham and a special jury had before them in a London court recently the case of Wooten v. Spence. It was an action to recover damages for breach of promise of marriage. The defendant denied making the promise, and pleaded that at the time it was alleged to be made he was a married man, of which fact the plaintiff was aware and had notice.

Mr Willis, Q.C., in opening the case, said he thought he would be able to satisfy the jury that at the time the defendant made this promise of marriage the plaintiff did not know that he was a married man. The plaintiff was a widow of forty-six years of age, who at the time she met the defendant kept a picture and furniture shop in Kingsland road. The defendant was between fifty and sixty yeare of age when he first met the plaintiff. He was a first class clerk in the Indian Office, and a man of most respectable character. In 1884 he proposed to marry her, and she accepted him, and for many years afterwards he was regarded as a man who was going to marry her. Many times afterwards he renewed that promise, but subsequently he broke it. In this case there were no love-letters, but the defendant used to write poetry to the plaintiff. There were " Lines written to Sophia " which began as follows: When rirst I met my Sophy clear 'Twos in a little shop, Oppressed by ice-cold poverty, And comfort not a chop. In subsequent verses the following phrases occurred : Her ruby lips so velvety, • So chamiing and so sweet. And—

May God preserve us thus to love In true sincerity. Not bad Hues for a gentleman in the India Office. There were other lines of a like character, but the defendant, in spite of his fine writing, refused to carry out his promise, and hence this action was brought. Mrs Sophia Wooten, the plaintiff, said that when she first knew the defendant she was thirty-four. He lised to come and look in at her window. On the first occasion that he came into the shop she was making tea in the kitchen, but her mother was in the shop. She was sent for, and c ime in. The defendant smiled ac her, and she smiled at him. He bought a picture for two shillings. Next week he came again and bought another picture. At his third visit he had tea with her mother and herself. The teapot broke, but the defendant sent out for a new one, and also for a pound of the be3t ham, which they shared between them. Again, a few days later, he came to see her. On that occasion he got on the top of a table, which was a little riokety, to inspect a picture on the wall. She was anxious about his safety, and held him up. He said she was the picture that he liked best, and he kissed her. After that she confided all her troubles to him, as women will. He sympathised with her, and shortly afterwards made proposals to her. He said : "Sophy, my girl, I love you and wish to make you my wife." He squeezed her so tight that he nearly broke her heart, being stout, so it must have been love. He said he had a relation who was very ill and whom he had to look after, but that after that person's death he would marry her directly. She said she could wait. He never told her that he had a wife living. She left her first shop in Kingsland road and took another. The defendant paid the rent of her new shop. He said he would do so till it was convenient for him to marry her. She had" qualms about taking the money, but eventually thought she would. Later she thought of taking a situation as housekeeper, but the defendant persuaded her not to do so. The defendant gave her jewellery, but it was not very good. No* having seen him for some time, she, in March, 1894, tried to find him out, but she discovered that he had given her a false address. She got a directory, and eventually found him at 18 Gra?Bbrook road, Stoke Newington. A boy in the street pointed out for her whioh was the defendant's house, and also said that his wife had but lately died. He kissed and caressed her. She said to him: " You gave me a wrong address and you have deceived me ; you told me you were a single man ; you have not treated me honorably." He said what did that matter, he loved her, and that after a twelvemonth from his wife's death he would marry her. She consented to wait. When the twelvemonth was up she went to see him,' and said she wanted a definite answer. He treated her very " indifferent," and said it was not convenient for him to marry her. Afterwards he came to her house andwasvßry endearing, and said he would marry her. Subsequently he dashed into her house *nd said He would not marry her, and then dashed out again. She consulted her solicitor and this action was brought. At this stage of the case, Mr Willis, Q.G., said that, a settlement, had been arrived at, and asked His Lordshlp;to allow the record to be withdrawn on the terms arranged. The terms were not -etatea in court.