A VICTORIAN BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXII, Issue 7179, 3 June 1885, Page 4

A VICTORIAN BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

lilNB,I iINB, MANAGER AND THE WIDOW. J iPcase.pf Piamstead v. Brige;s, in J i^the * plaintiff claims j.1200 ges; for" breach' of promise of marr^fas heard in the Supreme Court, ourne, repently, before Mr Justice attis and. a special jury of six. Mr h';and Mr Goldsmith appeared for iaintiff, and Mr J. T. T. Smith and saacß f or the defendant. plaintiff waa a widow named Pa%6lihe;A.nnio Plamstead, and the dof^d|ht;: was George Briggs, a mining p££sD£ger r .at Heathcote. The case for was that in June last she |c^frgsp6nded with the defendant in p;|||renee to entering into his service as iiT^usekeeper, and on the 2nd July the l^efendant came to town' and engaged !sf^£in-:that capacity. The plaintiff fgent: 'to i the defendant's house in shortly afterwards, and when l^vjfch'ad 'been in his service for about iPy\^Teekfl he aßked her to marry him, jjgll^y :- Plaintiff refused, as she thought pjn&i-' '• ; " '■"* u^ on7e -d his family, and ifeaffew.w / .offer was premature. She iqlth^tthe n »oi he had better wait Rordingly to* ' "«>re of each other. It JL^thfey< knew i_ ' that she should make <|;then arranged him, on condition •Effort to. care for to tho matter for afcr heydid not refer . give her an j&yiweeks, so as to is disposition ipbrtunity of studying h. d week in In the secoi* ''sswell, a |rgujt^ he/wrote tb Mrs Cr- her to jftitd&f the plaintiff's, asking . '*g e . 'ate^arrangements for the matt.. >c [l£iold plaintiff that the first time . ivy" herhe was determined she Bho_ia e^his'wifeif love and kindness could in?her affection. On the 16th August { jf^ptcmised to marry him, and on the Sowing day he wrote to hia youngest laghfer, who was in Sandhurst, to Isquaint her wifch the fact. Some fleks afterwards the defendant told ilaiiitiff quietly that he had changed his dindi as the family did not approve of premarriage; that his daughters pipught '"there was too much of the lady Souther for him, and he thought so po^and that now they knew he inepctectv'to- be married his daughters |ould;be glad to go to Heathcote and wap^houseior him. He said be must 'ojfegp his intention to marry, and the ififrhtiff bad better write to her friends Ming. them to put off the arrangonehtß. ■''» defence was that, though the .bfehdaut had made the offer as alleged first place, he had been refused, i&ty.had never renewed the offer. Ite.v-ral'i' witnesses who were called on Kii-'blhal-i detailed conversations whiah feey';ihad with, the plaintiff after her i:e|uraid tovvn, and the general tenor was to show that she !ad?rio affection for the defendant, and psuidVnot marry him under any cir(ifimstances. Sho stated on Beveral oc Sasioiis that she would not marry such Ivaitklugly old beast," who " put his knife in his mouth and his teeth ba the Mantelshelf^" l^borge Brigfis, tho defendant, stated engaged the plaintiff aa working sfiouaekeepsr in July, 1884. She com||a!ried of the loneliness of the place, his consant she sent for one of to come and stay with ?l_^!?-Some time afterwards he took her ioiSandhurst on visit to his daughters, _whb: : treated h^with marked coolness, complained of this at the r^miey' i^few days after their return he IS.rqvia'ner'wto Hertthcote in order to be present at the wedding of his nephew. ? ?JDljay returned home, and in tha evenIng.^caoh of them had four glasses of phißky toddy. After the second glass ?sh6. knelt down near the fire, as it was a $spi'_vwii_t.ry night. She pulled his head laowhtoWards her and kissed him, say|6g^hat she had felt tempted to do this life-first"; time they met. He paid her a liumber . of compliments during the and finally, after the fourth fglass of toddy, he asked her whether she |wphld not like to exchange the position for that of mistress. She feepliecl that she thought their tempers faiid dispositions were incompatible, and Resides; she could not accept him in Consequence 6f the manner in which she ffi|^,been treated by his family. She ifendiuded by saying that he had better iptlko&ed, as it was past eleven o'clock, prom.that time the offer of marriage |"^raa,hever renewed. Some days latter |be7?received a letter from his son, in of which he informed her piat.the best thing she could do would Ijbe'ftp go away from Heathcote, a3 his ;?iai_iiy were opposed to the connection, Bhe said she would go, but af terfwiards expressed her intention of waitImgvtill the two months had expired. tJOhe i night before she left he went to !;t>ecfc without wishing her good night. |She: came ( into the kitchen, which advjoined his room, and asked if she might i/jpiniel in. He replied that he was in nKedrbat ahe might come in if she liked. I She. entered the apartment, and said she ijmigitt.see him some day an old tottorpingvruan with none to care for him. fjtbe-rthen bent over and kissed him, pajing, "With all thy faults I love still," He positively denied her S_|ateinehtß aa to subsequent offers of fSmarriage, and stated that he had never ppl^poped to present her with an engageor a sewing machine. In ffefpss-examinationths defendant said he pfia'dTonly made the offer of marriage on referred to, and he would ll!pt:r_ave: made it then only for the l^fiisky.. '■■ The whisky did not make him s4,j?unk,' but incautious. At the conclupipnfbf "the evidence the jury returned a !|Hs|ct fpr, plaintiff for £200 and costs.