A DUBLIN BREACH OF PROMISE.

Evening Star, Issue 4143, 7 June 1876, Page 4

A DUBLIN BREACH OF PROMISE.

. A ’ breach of promise case, Annie

Browne v. William Prescott, came before the Master of the Dublin Court of Common Pleifl and a jury on recently for assessment of damages, judgment having been allowed to go by default. The plaintiff was described as a schoolmistress, residing with her parents at Parsonage street, Salford. The defendant, who is two or three yeatos her senior, is a young Scotchman, in business .in Dublin as a dyer. . The plaintiffs counsel stated that his client was the daughter of an industrious master builder in Salford. She had been well educated, and tvsro years ago appointed head mistress of St Gabriel's Schools, Manchester, at a 'salary of LBS, a year, fjast July she came to Dublin, on a visit to her aunt, i Mrs Bn,chanan, and at h,ev aunt 1 * house j the -defendant was introduced to her. [He went wfth her twice to a Sower show, and fell in love with her. After a stay ot a few days she was returning to Manchester, and defendant asked; and obtained leave to, see her off On the same day he wrote her a letter in the language of ardent affection, and between that day and September, when he broke off the engagement, he wrote her, eighteen further letters. In the first letter he said; “ I wish I was near you just now to have a few nice kisses and subscribed himself, “ Your own imosb affectionate and loving Willie. 1 * In her reply plaintiff said that “in fancy’s dreams she was still in dear old Dublinand signed the letter, “ Yours lovingly, Annie.” In his next letter the defendant called plaintiff “My darling Annie.” He “ sent forty kisses,” and shortly afterwards he “ sent a thousand kisses.” Plaintiff said she liked Dublin and its people; and in reply the defendant said, “ I am very glad you like Dublin so much. There are some very nice buildings, including pretty little houses for newly-married people. How very nice it would be to have a little house about Bathmines, and a pleasant wife like somebody I know to furnish it. But if you only saw Dublin on a wet day the mud is dreadful. I won’t say anything about the people—only that the ladies are considered handsome—but there is more than geod looks in the nineteenth’ century.” Defendant paid the plaintiff a visit at her parents’ house in August, and after his return wrote a formal proposal of marriage, which the plaintiff, with the approbation of her parents, accepted. Defendant again went over on the IGth of September, spent a day with the I plaintiff at Buxton, returned to Dublin on the 18th September, and on the 20th wrote, “ I feel that our engagement was rather premature, and that it would be well for us to know more }f each other before taking such a serious Step.” The jury awarded the plaintiff J L3OOi ; '