REMARKABLE BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 8919, 25 September 1890, Page 4

REMARKABLE BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

A remarkable breach of promise case was tried at the Lewis Assizes on the 10th and 12th of August, before Baron Huddleston. Miss Gladys Knowles, a young lady of 21, connected with the family of Sir Francis Cowles, claimed £25,000 from Mr Leslie Duncan, proprietor and editor of the " Matrimonial News." The defendant's age was stated to be 63. Mr Willis, in opening the case, said that in March the plaintiff wrote to the defendant for a copy of the " Matrimonial News." One was sent, with an intimation that if she liked to meet the editor an appointment could be made. She called the same day, and saw the defendant, who Baid: " I suppose yon want a hnsband ? " She replied: " I don't know that I want a husband; I am quite content at home; butl hear you havepersonsoflarge wealth able to bring happiness and large means to a yonng lady." After various inquiries, the defendant invited her to call again with her mother. She did so, and the defendant talked about his houses, means, and prosperous condition, and said if he was not 63 or 64 years of age he would marry her himself. He was so pleased with ber appearance and manners at the next interview, that he pressed her hand, saying, "Gladys, I am madly in love with yon." On otber occasions he took her for a drive. On April 2 he proposed while driving her to the park. Plaintiff added to the foregoing that on May 18 she paid a vißit to his residence at Gray Court, Waytown. He gave her a wedding ring on her arrival, and another ring worth £180. On May 19 ho told her that he had lost or left the marriage license behind, aud would have to get another. On the Monday, after sho had retired to rest for the night, she awoke and saw Duncan standing by the bed. She ordered him to leave, but he did not. The following day he said he would get tho license. He told her to be at his office at 8.30 in the evening. She was there, and he then told her that he was awfully sorry, but that he was unable to get the license. She asked what she was to do, and he replied there was only one thing; she must come and stop with him. She said she would not do any such thing; she would go home and see if her mother had returned. The defendant answered that if she did it wonld ruin his name everywhere; she must come to a hotel with him, bnt could have a separate bedroom if she liked. It was then past 10 o'clock, and Bhe consented to go to a hotel. An hour and a-half after she had been in her room someone knocked at tho door. She opened ifc, and'Duncan entered. After tbis he fixed several other dates for marriage. All the arrangements were rhade, but it never came off. She waa deeply attached to him, and was always willing to marry him. She had been ill aver since these occurrences. He told her he had £30,000 in stocks, and several houses, coal wharves, and other property, and promised to settle £1500 a year on her during her married life, and £4000 per year on his death. A close cross-examination followed, and the plaintiff fainted, and was attended to by a medical man in court. Mrs Knowles,.plaintiff's mother, said that the defendant told her he had been the means of effecting 40,000 marriages in high life in the last 40 years. The jury were absent for 10 minutes and returned a verdict for the plaintiff giving her £10,000 damagei.