BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 451, 12 January 1869, Page 2

BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.

KNOX V. HUNT. The Auckland Supreme Court was densely crowded on Thursday, Dec. 17, when the case of Margaret Knox v. William Alexander Hunt commenced before a Special Jury. Messrs Whitaker, Hesketh, and Macdonald appeared on behalf of the plaintiff, who sought to recover the sum of £5,000 damages; and Messrs Giles and Joy for the defendant. The following issues were submitted to the Jury : —l. Did plaintiff and defendant in November, 1867, and at any other time subsequently agree to marrj each other? 2. Was the plaintiff always willing and ready to marry the defendant ? 3. Did the defendant after such agreement marry another person ? 4. What damages, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover? The following is some evidence given in the case :

Thomas James Dixon deposed: I arrived in this Colony three years and a half ago, and the plaintiff came out along with me. I am her uncle; her parents are both dead, and I and my wife are her guardians. Defendant and plaintiff are acquainted with each other, and I first became aware of 1 about the beginning of October, 18^-

I was first introduced to Mr Hunt bj plaintiff at the North Shoreon Boxing day last year. Defendant generally spent his time at my house except whih he was away at the Thames. Aftej the first time of seeing defendant ] became his clerk, and at the end of i fortnight I went to the Thames witl him as clerk. About the beginning oJ February, 1868, Mr Hunt came tc live with us ; previous to that time, he took all his meals with us, but slept at tho Army and Navy hotel; I told him it was extravagant to do that—he was paying board wages at the hotel —and 1 offered him a bed in our house. We returned from the Thames at the latter end of Feburary ; the next day after our rosurn, while all the family was at breakfast, we had a conversation, which was introduced by Mr Hunt sayiug he was going to Melbourne, and intended to take "Maggie" (Miss Knox) with him. When he said this, I said it was the best time he could take her, as they would have no children to interfere with their pleasure. He had made an appointment with me with reference to his marriage ; which was to take place on the 18th of March, provided the steamer should sail for the South next afternoon. I was to get a piece of land for him near Tararu (the Thames), and was to have a house built upon it by the time Mr and Mrs Hunt (Miss Knox) came from Melbourne. Mr Hunt said he would see Mr Jones about netting the license. At the time he said this, he was sitting on the couch with Miss Knox, and he had his arm over her neck, about her shoulders as it were, with her [hands clasped in his other hand. Nothing tianspired on the 18th March. About the midd.e of April Hunt called me into his bedroom at the Thames, and told me that he had broken off his engagement with Maggie—my niece Margaret—plaintiff in this action. I said, " You don't mean to stand up there and tell such a thing as that," and I was a good deal surprised. He said, " Such is the case," I asked him his reasons, and he assigned one as to Miss Knox having told a story to Mrs Cobley relative to her (Mrs Cobley's) mother-in-law. I told him I should not think that Miss Knox would be capable of such a thing. He told me what the story was; it was that Mrs Cobley's mother-in-law drank. Mrs Cobley was the wife to one of Hunt's partners at that time. He assigned as a reason that no one else could have told Mrs Cobley this, and said it was a breach of confidence, and that he would not have her for a wife after such a thing had occurred. From what I understood of the matter, it appeared that Hunt had told this story to Miss Knox, who had told it to Mrs Cobley. (Laughter.) I said it was a vary lame, excuse, and asked him if he had any other reasons. He said he had an account of her conduct at Mr Clarkson's wedding. I asked him how she had conducted herself, and he replied that she had kissed Mr Brock. (Laughter.) I asked him if she had conducted herself in an improper manner on that occasion, why he did not break off his engagement with her there and then. (Clarkson was married a day or two previous to Christmas.) He then said something about having known Miss Russel for some time; and he thought Miss Knox did not love him. I told him he must know very little love himself if he did not know that Miss Knox did love him. (Laughter.) I said that he never would have entered my house had I not been fully of Miss Knox's feelings towards him. He wanted to arrange the matter between us by compensating Miss Knox, and giving me a share in a good claim. I told him that I had only heard his story. I declined making any arrangements with him until I saw my niece. He and I came up to Auckland from the Thames the same day, and as we came ashore we parted. He did not on that occasion come to my house. He came, however, a month before he was married—some time in the beginning of August. He then came along with Miss Knox in the evening. He stayed to supper, and remained some little time after. On this occasion he treated her as he had done formerly, before breaking off the engagement. He sat beside her, and had his arm about her. Previous to leaving, 1 heard him say to Miss Knox, who°had wished him to stay the night, " That she might trust him now." They parted at the door. He shook hands with my wife and myself, and then went out with Miss Knox on to the verandah. He then shook hands with her and kissed her. Upon the occasions I have referred to in the first portions of my evidence, when defendant used to leave our house at night, defendant and plaintiff used to part when he went and kissing. It was in the inonth of April that I gave Mr Hunt this dissertation en the power of love. (Laughter.) lam not aware that she •aid she did not like the color of his hair or his whiskers (laughter,) and that she would have somebody else. I have heard these words—not all of them—since this was broken off. I never heard her say that he did not speak enough to please her, —that he spoke to other people who were present more than to her.

Cross-exainiantion: Hunt said Miss Knox did not love him, and that he was displeased at her having kissed Brock. I never heard of his having been displeased at her kissing Brock before April. This was nearly four months after Clarkson's marriage, and he never mentioned it to me before the occasion I bave referred to. I saw nothing of Miss Knox's conduct

at Clarkson'B wedding. I was not present, and could not say how many she kissed. I am not aware that Miss Knox's told Hunt that she had kissed Brock at the wedding of Clarkson's. I never got Miss Knox's age out of her. (Laughter.) I know by the bible what it is—she will be 22 years old on some day in February next. I can't be certain about the day. I can't state whether Miss Knox had any other lovers or sparks during this time. (Langhter.) She was generally left pretty much to herself by Mrs Dixon. I saw them kiss on the occasion I have mentioned ; it was in my presence. They were in the habit of doing that sort of thing before he broke the match off. I did not always stand there and look on, but I used to see it if I happened to be in the room, which would often occur. I have seen them kissing each other morethan half-a-dozen times. I heard Miss Knox did receive .£3O, and it was laid out in buying a wedding outfit, which is still at my house. I have 3een the outfit. I have marked some of the underlinen. (Laughter.) Annie Dixon, the wife of the last .vitness, corroborated the evidence of her husband, and R. Bartlett, a photographer, and Samuel Alexander, a miner, were called. Witnesses were also called to prove that Hunt's claim had yielded last year 25,000 ounces. For the defence Mrs Sarah Ford was called, and she stated that "if Mr Hunt and Miss Knox were courting, it was funny courting." The Court was crowded with spectators. ladies' gallery was full of well-dressed females. Indeed the appearance of the gallery had very much the appearance of a "grand stand," and the resuH of the love chase that was going on below, the more so as the odds were so great and the match so unequal. Those who evidently came to hear a lawyer's notion of a broken •heart must have been disappointed. The young lady who was the centre of this popular interest did not make her appearance except on the first day, when she came in for identification. The Jury retired to consider their verdict at a quarter to twelve, and returned into Court with a verdict for the plaintiff—damages £I3OO.