HE WAS AN APT PUPIL.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume VIII, Issue 44, 31 October 1891, Page 529

HE WAS AN APT PUPIL.

At the Manchester Assizes recently, Miss Hannah Pendlebnry claimed damages for breach of promise of marriage from Mr D. Doody. The plaintiff and the defendant had been worshipping tor a long time past at the Zion Chapel, Collyhurst. The defendant had been engaged to a lady in Sheffield, but finding that another young man living on the spot was in the running, he concluded he had not a fair chance, and broke off the engagement. One night at the chapel Miss Pendlebury directed the plaintiffs attention to a text on the wall. ‘ As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.’ He remarked upon this that she had not a house at present, but she very soon would have, as he had broken off his engagement with the Sheffield young lady. A night or two afterwards he again proposed marriage to the plaintiff'. She pointed out that she was some years older than he was —she was thirty-five and he was twenty seven. His answer was that there was nothing in that to complain about. Thereupon she consented to become his wife, and the matter was patched up in the usual way. This was on the 17th of December. On the 18th he wrote to say how pleased he was, and that he felt sure they would be very happy. ‘ Last night,’ he wrote, ‘ is really like a dream. The uncertainty of the light, and, best of all, the delightful solitude, made the world only seem to contain two folk. The memory kept me awake half the night.’ Miss Pendlebury said that for two years previous to her engagement with the defendant they had been on very intimate terms. There had been no love-making, but they were very dear friends. It was at a Band of Hope tea

meeting that the conversation took place about the text on the wall, * As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.’ < )n the night of the 17th December she met him at the chapel, and after the service they went to Queen’s Park Museum. Defendant pointed out several pictures, and said they would do ‘for our little home.’ Her reply was, * Don’t be foolish.’ Then he asked her what was her idea of domestic happiness. She replied, * A bright fireside, a

nice, cosy tea-table, and a smiling wife,' and he smiled, and ‘ drew me a little closer.’ She said that she never tried to ‘ lure on ’ the defendant while he was engaged to the Sheffield lady, but that she wrote the following Tetter to him :— Dear Brother Doody,—You will be awfully surprised to get this letter from me. Please don’t call me cheeky or anything like that, for lam doing it quite unknown to myself so am excusable. lam very much in need of a gentleman friend for Wednesday or

Thursday, and thought if you were at liberty you would enjoy going to see the ‘ Private Secretary ’ at the T.R Dear Brother D., oh, yield to temptation, I pray thee, for we would have such fun, to see the S. would be so rum Believe me to be your wicked old friend, H.P. She had been engaged to another person four or five years aijo. She had not made any particular preparation for the marriage. It was true that the engagement had only lasted

for two or three months, but the defendant had made as much progress in that time as some men would in three years. She was speaking from personal experience. The jury awarded the plaintiff' £5 with costs.