Breach of Promise Case.

Cromwell Argus, Volume V, Issue 233, 28 April 1874, Page 7

Breach of Promise Case.

WWWWI Bdd id rial iff sonotwsro"vif. rdf,Turd /o hit*, tivi t>d\»nnni»iflQ£d by telegrmniin-ourdastnssiio, w.dre '^la.iWed,' asJhMT m ageß^jirhW.M^^ tKo cafiriff-d-' >% * Mr Macassey, in stating, the’ 6ds6°fb£.4h'i plaintiff, said? thja,fpreß&rt <! c n 1 atedi to; gtitjfy ;iahy feelings :of‘ noriwduidiiti pfoAjQjie.i any amusement. Any gratification of that* kind] or‘the perpetration of tfioߧJdk’4S; t, fi4iicli tefute Sydney Smith’s calumny as,to .the people who. came from the norar;or the'Tweeft, L Mr SteVatt to use words of Mr Holloway at tlie Masonic Hall the other evening, was horn of “humble “respectable parents.,” “ Her . father waA mhhfiger of a calico factory in Glasgow, mid, die,d in l’BsJfy , Shortly after, his widbtv ana four daughters emigrated M’ Otago. Their pother had. bee.ii here some time before, having., settled here; some twelve months, parimr. ■. Mrs Forrester continued here some' five or six months agoj when ahe , Aie4, ||to would now pass from 1857 toT§67-.’ The family, then went to live in Hanoyer-street, and one of their acquaintancea Was a Mr Butters, then chief-engineer of the Lord Ashley, and now holding a simi- . lar position-W the Thranaki, .Blitters’ intrdi ' duced/ ; Mr Darlirig-, the defendant, to’ the 'Forresters, ; and it happened in a short time that the former wag left out in’ the cold, his place 5 being 1 filled by l Barling. He 4 (Mr Macassey)‘did 'not for a moment ihsinnate I that Butters was bent on matrimony when he visited the Forrester family. At all events Darling Sjieed ily announced his intention, and before long was the accepted suitor of the plaintiff. He did, not desire to trouble the jury with the billings and codings of the happy cojiple, because,, they extended over a considerable number of years.' No:sooner ! was he accepted than he placed' himself on 1 terms of perfect ease with the rest of , the family :‘called Mrs Forrester “ mother,” and 1 her daughters by their Christian names, and • it would be,shown in evidence, by defendant’s own letters, thatffie accustomed himself to ; speak of the defendant as his “Dear Maggie.” ' More than tliat',- it 1 Would appear 'that in ‘ March 1888—the intimacy having commenced in 1887—Barlniq went to Mr Hislop’s, jewellet, and procured from him. a ring, on which 1 he had .engraved,' “ ’to; M. .F”; It 1 would be shown that, with the prevailing ‘ vanity of the age, he from time to time pre- ’ rented Miss, Forrester With photographs. TheI 1 fulfilment of the engagement’.'between, the ,i parties wasMeferred from time ton time, upon; f the' suggestion,pf-the defendant himself, and 1 for cauae.3 which at tlie. time .appeared pei 1 - ! fcctly reasonable.; The ring before alluded •' to, when purchased, was presented bv Bar- ! ling.itg»/MMs and gHfen to her in ' the presence of her sisters, the defendant say- 1 ing, “ Now Maggie, consider yourself as good 1 as married.” When afterwards tlie solem- 1 nisation of the marriage was referred to defendant.put forward the strange reason’that f he had not amassed sufficient to marry upon. 1 He spoke about being worth £‘lo,ooo or j £II,OOO, and said he should be worth £20,000 1 before lie married. As appeared hereafter, < he forgot that “ It is better to be off with the f old love before you are on with the new.” It ’ would appear that, in addition to this one * string to, his bow—the plaintiff-he had 1 another string, and some additional minor s strings. In March 1872, Darling having been 1 down sputh, returned overland, and, getting ‘ off the coach at the Taieri, went to Mrs For- A roster’s house at Mosgiel. where the latter and J Miss Jane were residing, Miss Margaret £ being wen .employed in Dunedin. He stopped £ there a night and the following day.' He was £ manifestly under extreme excitement, and < told Miss Jane that'his conscience had been 1 troubling him for some' time ; but he had I made up his mind to unburthen himself, i He then told Miss Jane that during the five i or six years that he was the affianced lover 1 of her sister he had carried on an adulterous 1 intercourse with a married woman named Wat £ son, by whom he admitted having had seve- 1 ral children. ; Miss Charlotte was sent for, f and after talking the matter over with her, ( he made the most abject and humiliating ’ apology a man, could possibly make. He I £ promised to send the woman and the chil- i f dren awav, and the relations between him • and Miss Forrester were not interfered with. 1 . la July 1872, Darling went to Scotland, and ( although he promised to return and marry 1 Miss Forrester within a year, two years had £ since elapsed, and .he, had not fulfilled his £ engagement j but still., remained at Home. £ The second string to his bow and the minor strings went Home in March 1873, in the City of Dunedin. V ‘. Mr Macassey then read two letters sent 11 from Home by Darling to the plaintiff. ] i either of them contain many expressions of lore, nor is any mention made of marriage, i n the first, be refers to “the enormity of . o my wickedness,” in reference to the woman j , t atson, and states his determination, tpu egahse, if I can, my poor unfortunate j children. He says also ; “If I should for- j icit the good opinion of those that are dear 1 1 o me, I trust you will not misinterpret my | c feelings when 1 say with a sad, sad heart, 1 that however you' may regard me, I can only i mink of you and your family as the dearest 1 friends I ever had on earth; To be mofeis ! impossible.- The second is almost entirely 1 1 on general subjects. He merely ventures tlie rather Complimentary remark that “ I 'or knew a woman more capable of under- + Rtandmg mo better than yourself.” Speak-' s i.k. s i between capital and t r, he says : “ I confess I love my conn- fi

with her old ancTigranA associations far Mr’ MaeaSsey, wAs' what ‘by all' Scotchmen. And Mr-Macas&ey quite agreed | with him in anhga tfeMu'ks • “ It is , aiSiiiiit The learned Counsel, concluded^by-calling on | ihe jury to award the plaintiff exemplary { flamages., ... . ( I The p!aiinfe^s»sfeter J wa§ .examined at great length. Her ev idenqe ■ bore-out counsel’s opening - statement;; I In cross-examination, it was attempted to get her to acknowledge' that the fojir : sisters had continually been bothering Barling to take them to concerts and tails ; but' theJonly admission she would make was that “he Went with lis to a prayer meeting one niglr't” it Mosgiel. V' ’ " Mr Stewart addressed the jury for. defendant ; and His Honor summed up. In the ‘ course of his address the latter “ alluded to the.fact that: the plaintiff and', defendant had '] gone to a prayer meeting together. In the Presbyterian Church/'this' Was no doubt r looked upon as significant of the fact that the parties were engaged, while Episcopalians / —more profane people who went to dances —would think little of it.” ■ v ,! * 1 The Jury then, retired, and in about ten minutes returned wrara verdict for the plaintiff; da mages,;.£2so. . 1