ACTION FOR BREACH OF PROMISE AGAINST A LADY.

Grey River Argus, Volume IX, Issue 710, 6 August 1870, Page 1 (Supplement)

ACTION FOR BREACH OF PROMISE AGAINST A LADY.

A curious breach of promise case has been. heard at ike Court of Queen's Bench, Dublin. The action was brought by Ross M'Mahon, described as of Francis street, in the city of Dublin, commercial traveller, against Anne Farrell, of Castle-hill, in the town of Carlow, pawnbroker. Damages were laid at L3OO. The plaintiff was a widow, with four grewn-up boys, and carried on business as a pedlar, buying goods in England, and selling or pledging them in Ireland. In the course of these transactions he became acquainted with the defendant, a widow, with one child five years old, aud an intimacy sprang up, which ended in November, 1869, in an agreement that they should bo married. It appeared that the brothers and other relatives of the defendant were averse to the match; The plaintiff had agreed to makea marriage settlement, in a particular way, of L6OO upon the defendant, and a draft of that settlement was drawn up, which was submitted to a solicitor. This, however, he had not done, and it was alleged that the defendant herself was satisfied with the arrangement, and fixed Easter Tuesday for the marriage to take place. The plaintiff subsequently offered to confirm the contract, but he was threatened to be kicked out of the house. The plaintiff gave evidence in support of the promise of to marry, aad of the arrangement in reference to the settlement. On cross examination by Mr Montgomery^ • he denied that he had forced his way into the bedroom of the defendant against her will, but stated that when she wasillhe sat beside her bedside by her request, and adminstered medicine by the doctor's directions, two nurses being present. Then her illness became serious, she gave him a bunch of keys,- and directed him to take her gold lever watch, her earrings and finger rings, and a copy of her father's will, which she directed him to keep in the event of her death, and this property he still retained, and produced as evidence of the relation which then existed between him and the defer dant. The ring was an engaged ring, for he engaged it to be fifteen carats. He did not think it delicate to assist in nursing her at her own request when she was ill, nor did he think it dishonest to retain possession of her property till the case was over. In reply to his lordship witness said that he had not L6OO in either money or value at the time he engaged to sign the marriage settlement. All the property or money he had in the world was what he carried about in his pedlar's pack, but he was in a position to raise goods on credit in. England. His Lordship : " Had you, LIOO at the time ?" " Witness : " I anfev sure I had in watches and cloth. I v^^i in good business at the time, and MBJte^v able to make 10s on every watch Ibongmf | in England by pledging it in Ireland!" j Mr Heron handed in letters, which he relied on, from the defendant to the plaintifi all of which commenced " Dear. Ross," and concluded " Yours, affectionately, Anne Farrell ;" but their contents related altogether to business transactions between them. No evidence was given for the defendant, and Mr Keogh. ad- : dressed the jury for the plaintiff. Mr j Montgomery submitted that the plaintiff should be non-suited inasmuch as there was no evidence of a promise to marry, and in the next place, if there waS such a promise, it was made conditionally on the plaintiff entering into settlement, which he was unable to complete. His lordship said he would leave these questions to the jury. Verdict was found for the defendant. At the conclusion of the case, the defendant's attorney demanded Mrs FarrelTs property from the plaintiff, but he declined to give it up, whereupon Mrs Farrell threatened to give him into the custody of the police. An immense crowd assembled in the outer hall, and on defendant making her appearance she was loudly cheered.