A FICKLE SWAIN.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 11538, 24 November 1900, Page 2 (Supplement)

A FICKLE SWAIN.

THREE HUNDRED POUNDS DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF PROMISE. At the London Sheriff's Cnirt, a few days ago, before Mr. Under-Sheriff Burchell and a jury, the remitted case of Sewell v. Strange came on for the assessment of damages. This was an action to recover damages for breach of promise of marriage, the plaintiff being Miss Minetta Sewell, formerly assistant manageress at the Royal Kentish Hotel, Tunbridge Wells, and defendant Mr. Cbas. Henry Strange, who occupies a good position in the same town. Counsel said that the parties became acquainted in May, 1897, when plaintiff was at tho Royal Kentish Hotel. Three months later defendant proposed, and was accepted, and he gave plaintiff an engagement ring. Six weeks later plaintiff was told that defendant was a married man. She taxed him with this. At first he denied it, but was ultimately bound to admit it, as he was at that time actually living with his wife at Tunbridge Wells. He pleaded hard with plaintiff that she would wait for him, as his wife, was dying. As a matter of fact, this was true, and his wife died a few months latex. In the meantime, plaintiff had been placed in a most terrible position, but defendantvowed that the moment he was free he would make plaintiff his wife, and she consented to wait. Finding, however, her position very false, she left Tunbridge Wells, went to Dover, and afterwards to Folkestone. Mrs. Strange died early in 1898, and up till May this year defendant wrote letters of a mostardent, loving character, but then he asked to be released after a three years' engagement. Defendant wrote to the plaintiff twice a day sometimes, and there was an enormous bundle of love letters. In July, 1897, he wrote: —

My darling Min, — must think me a hard, callous little brute, but I tell you candidly, my love, if I cannot have all your confidence I do not want any; half-and-half things will not suit me. Perhaps I carry things too far; if so, my darling, you must put it down to the love I have for you. You are all in all to me; you are my everything. I would far rather kill myself than intentionally cause you one moment's pain or unhappiness. For doing so this afternoon I ask your forgiveness, and if it only makes you love me the more I cannot say I am truly sorry. Let us kiss and be friends, my darling, or I shall never know another moment's happiness.—Yom own, Habry.

Further letters followed, some signed " Your own devoted boy, Harry," and " Your own loving and devoted sweetheart (hubby), Harry." Counsel further stated that defendant agreed to pay plaintiff £500 in instalments of £5 per month, but she was not satisfied with this, and so the action was brought. Plaintiff, a lady of 34 years, who was dressed in deep mourning, went into the box and bore out her counsel's statement. When "defendant's wife died he renewed his promise and gave her a fresh engagement ring. In cross-examination plain/tiff admitted that the photo, produced, was that of her daughter, aged 12 years. Re-examined, plaintiff swore that she told defendant all her past before she became engaged to him, and counsel read letters showi ing that defendant knew it and promised most sacredly to keep her secret. Counsel asked for heavy damages for defendant's heartless conduct.

Mr. Wooll'ey, in defence, urged that defendant was a poor man now, as he had left his father's employ at Tunbridge Wells. His father kept a hosier's shop on the Pantiles. The jury awarded plaintiff the sum of £300.