A NEW ZEALAND BREACHOF-PROMISE CASE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2451, 6 March 1901, Page 11

A NEW ZEALAND BREACH-OF-PROMISE CASE.

CLAIM FOR £30,000 DAMAGES.

(From Our Own Correspondent.)

LONDON, December 28. Some months ago I sent you preliminary particulars of a truly tremendous action for breach of promise of marriage, in which the plaintiff, Catherine M'Ewen, or Brodie, who was for many years resident in New Zealand, and who is now an artist practising her profession in Glasgow, sought to recover these gigantic damages from Mr David Macgregor, a wellknown Glasgow contractor.

The trial of this remarkable action was begun yesterday in the Court of Session, Edinburgh, before the Lord Justice-clerk (Lord Kingsburgh) and a jury, Mr Shaw being counsel for the plaintiff — or " pursuer," as she is called in the Scottish law — and Mr Salvesen for the " defender."

Catherine M'Ewen, or Brodie, the pursuer, examined by Mr Shaw, gave her age as 43 years, and deposed that she was married in 1879 to Mr O. S. Brodie, a son of the late Chief Judge of Ceylon, and lived with him in New Zealand. After 10 years of married life her husband was unfaithful to her, and she divorced him at Wellington, arR3 returning to Scotland she lived with her mother in Edinburgh. She knew the defender when a child at school. He if as # then a toll-bar keeper in Perthshire, but had since made a great fortune. In 1894 she went to Glasgow, thinking that city would be a better market for her pictures, and there she again met the defender, who promised to do what he could to help her in her profession. In these early days he said that if anyone was entitled to his money it was witness, and that he would like to see her children well provided for. Continuing, witness said : In the summer of 1897 I became engaged to be married to a gentleman in Glasgow named ' Nelson, and I told Mr Macgregor. The result of my engagement to this gentleman was a bitter wrong to myself. I was forced to bring an action against him. He had drugged me and overcame me. The upshot of the proceedings was that he paid me £10,050.

Mr Shaw : Mr Macgregor In this case says, with regard to you, that you were the mistress of the gentleman. The Pursuer: That is absolutely false. My impression wasithat, by the law of Scotland, I was absolutely his wife. That gentleman never stayed;.' in my house. He never gave me money, dress, or jewellery, or any gifts of that kind. The witness added that when she told the defender of the engagement he said, "I h^ped to have married you myself." She told fiim after the action that she could not think of marrying. Later he repeated the offer, and she accepted him. He said he was a very rich man, and paid £700 a year in income tax.

Mr Shaw : Did he say whether that was enough ? The Pursuer : He said it was not nearly all he ought to pay — (Laughter.) The Lord Justice-clerk: That was before the war. — (Laughter.)

The witness said the defender spoke about investing her money, promised that he would be a good father to her children, and said he had a great regard for her, her children, and her family. In June, 1899, the defender, in a scuffle, tried to knock her down, and she was confined to bed for a week. He afterwards called on her, and as he was very sorry, she forgave him. It was arranged that the marriage should take place in August, st Glasgow, and she had incurred expenditure of about £1000 on her trousseau and house-^ hold accounts.

On January 16 last witness asked defendant if he wanted to break off the engagement, because of his delays, and he replied " No." | She asked him to explain why he did not settle the date, and he referred to his housekeeper, and said he could not marry until she (the housekeeper) was dead. What he said shocked her, and she told him that if he considered his housekeeper so much, and witness so little, he should stay with the housekeeper.. The defendant afterwards said he did not mean that, and explained the de- f lay on account of business matters. '

On the 27th February last witness received a letter from the defendant as follows : — I " I have received your letter of 22nd, and am - surprised anJ. annoyed at it I have certainly never at any time promised you mar- , riage or asked you to be my wife, or ever led you to suppose that I intended to marry you." Witness said when she got that letter she received a great shock. On the 10th March they agfcin met, when defendant explained

that he could not marry her on account of ft letter he had received from her Edinburgh agent. Witness said it was cruel of him. At a later meeting defendant asked her whether £1000 down and £2500 in his will would satisfy her, and promised that Mr Sharp should draw up an agreement. Mr Sharp wrote on a piece of paper : " I hereby agree to take Mrs Brodie as my wife or pay her," and Mr Macgregor wrote in the figures "£200." Witness said she wanted £25,000. — (laughter) — and he replied that that was exorbitant. On the 24th March she had another meeting with the defendant, who was very rude, and said he would have nothing more to do with her.

Cross-examined by Mr Salvesen : She was married to Mr Brodie before the registrar. Her mother objected to the marriage. Mr Salvesen : Did your husband complain of your conduct with a man called ?

Mr Shaw objected. That wa3 a direct attack on the moral character of witness, and was not alleged on the record. Mr Salve«en said Hie question was relevant as a test of the witness's credibility, and as to the character and antecedents of the pursuer. ■> The Lord Justice-clerk said he thought it was a most extraordinary course to follow.

The witness denied that there was any ground for the suggestion of immorality with Dr Gibson in New Zealand. Asked if it wastrue that she had been confined in an asylum for mental trouble, the witness completely bioke down, and appealingly turned to his Lord.ship, who informed her that perhaps it would be better if she answered the question. Witness thpn entered into a long explanation of her husband's cruelty, through which she had to go to the asylum. She believed that she should never have been confined in the asylum.

Mr Salvesen read part of a letter wh'ch witness had sent to her husband, in which she said : " I hear that ymi are going to many this Mrs Murthley, but I hope that if you do. marry again you will marry for money. It will only be money which will make me marry again. I can assure you. You can keep your mind at rest on that. If you meet anyone rich enough you can send him to me." The Pursuer saic 1 she could not recollect writing that letter, and her belief was it was written jocularly. The Lord Justice-clerk : Do you suggest, Mr Salvesen, that the letter was seriously meant ? Mr Salvesen : I do. The Lord Justice-clerk : Well, it seems a gro^s waste of time to make any such suggestion. In reply to further questions, witness said it was not true that she sold pictures in her own name which had been painted by other people. She had never made an agreement with Mr M'Donald, R.S.A., that he was to paint pictures and sell them as hers. Mr M'Donald had p«t i n figures in some of her pictures, and had complimented her on her painting. Mr Salvesen : I understand that Mr Macgregor never purchased a picture from you ? The Pursuer : No, he was much too mean to do so. — (Laughter.) Questioned as to her relations with Mr Nelson, pursuer said he several times tried to take liberties, and on the second occasion she knocked him down. On another occasion her maid found her lying insensible. She had been drugged. She was several times drugged, and Nelson admitted having drugged her. Nelson then asked her to allow familiarities, explaining that if she would, according to Scottish law, become his wife. She then allowed his embraces, and he promised that they would be married by a clergyman.

Re-examined, witness said she believed her former husband was a witness in the present action. A more cruel and bitter life than she led with him no woman would well endure, and that led her to write sarcastically the letter whioh had been produced.

Two doctors who attended the pursuer gave evidence to the effect that they regarded defeudant as plaintiff's intended husband, and that the plaintiff had suffered in health in consequence of the defendant's conduct.

Two hotel servants in Glasgow spoke to Mr Macgregor having regularly visited Mrs Brodie while she stayed in the hotel. One of the servants remarked to plaintiff that while she was handsome, he was a little plain. — (Laughter.)

His Lordship : There is a shorter way of putting it according to the fairy tale. — (Laughter.)

[The ease was not concluded when the mail left, but cur cablegrams have informed us that Mrs Brodie was awarded £5000 damages.]

The Bruca Herald says that the new drive in the Fortification Railway and Coal Company's mine has now been driven about 350 ft into the hill, and good coal has been met with throughout.