AMUSING IRISH BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

Kumara Times, Issue 969, 7 November 1879, Page 4

AMUSING IRISH BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

At Limerick Assizes, before Judge Barry, the case of Alice Normile v. Jame 3 Cagney ha 3 just been heard. Mr Atkinson, in opening the ptaading, said this was an action to recover LBOO from the defendant fcr breach of promise of marriage. Plaintiff, a handsome young woman, is the daughter of a farmer residing in Ballinskilbeg, County Limerick. Defendant is also a farmer, and resides in Balinakillicassy, and is a neighbor of the plaintiff. He is a widower, his wife having died recently. The defendant pleaded that he never agreed to marry plaintiff; or that if he did they agreed to dissolve the contract by mutual consent. But there were two rather more frolicsome defences—one was that he was to receive a marriage portion of L3OO, payable before the marriage ; but, more extraordinary still, that the promise to marry was consequent on his receiving the consent of his father-in-law, the father of his deceased wife. (Great laughter.) There was a defence !—one of the most romantic ever made by a widower with two children. (Laughter.) The wedding had been arranged by the two families. Alice (the plaintiff) was to receive L3OO as a fortune, the defendant declaring that he could get another girl with L6OO, but he preferred his "darling Alice," and showed her his keys which, he said, would make her mistress of his house. They arranged to be married at Shrovetide. They went to confession to prepare for the solemn ceremony ; but on the day for the performance of the marriage Cagney failed to make his appearance, and Miss Normile has since been pointed out as " The girl I left behind me." (Laughter.) The plaintiffs brother went on the Monday to Shrovetide to defendant, and asked Cagney why he did not fulfil his promise, and come up to his (Normile's) house He said he was not able to go, his wife was so lately dead, and many other lame excuses, during which a man named Riordan said to Cagney, "Faith, you were not able to go to Normile's because you were up at Liston's arrangiug a marriage with his daughter, and you are to get L 600." And so it turned out to be, he married Miss Liston and got this L6OO. The defendant in the course of his evidence, said—My eldest daughter, by my first wife, is 15 years of age. I never spoke to plaintiff until 2nd November last, when I went with her brother to her home. I drank too much liquor there, but don't remember anything about making the match. In the following February, in Newcastle, the plaintiff's brother offered me L3OO if I would marry her. I said L3OO would not do me. I wanted L 350. I drank a great deal, and recollect nothing more. When I awoke I was in bed with my clothes on in Normile's house. When young Normile cams to me to marry his sister, I told him I could not as my father-in-law would not give his consent. (Laughter.) The Judge : And you married another woman the next day ? (Laughter.) Witness: Yes. (Great laughter.) The Judge : And while you were bargaining for the plaintiff you were already engaged to your present wife?—The witness shook his head, and said, Yes, ray lord (Laughter.) I got no fortune with my wife Ellen Liston, nor a promise. To Mr Atkinson —lf Miss Normile's father had come down with L4OO I would have thrown up Miss Liston. (Great laughter.( I would not have married them both (Renewed laughter.) I was engaged to Miss Liston white I was proposing for .the plaintiff(Laughtor.) The Normiles said I would get L3OO with the plaintiff, but they did not produce the money. I told them I would not marry without my father-in-law's consent. (Laughter.)— The Judge : And yet you married next day without his oonsent ?—Witness: Yes. (Great laughter.)-The jury found for the plaintiff, LOO damages and costs.

A fourth contingent of colliers, with their families, left Barnsley late on the night of August 19, bound for New Zealand. A Government agent has selected 50 from the coalfields of South Yorkshire, and with Derbyshire, Durham, and Cannock Chase colliers, with their families, numbering probably 200, they embarked en August 28. A singular case came before the Ashburton Court recently. Nicholas Fitzgerald, a settler at Wakanui, sued a neighbor, named Martha Gibson, for L4l 183, being the value of a crop of wheat, which it was alleged she had wrongfully converted to her own use. It appeal s that between FKzgerald and Gibson's farm was a piece of land, comprising about twenty acres, and over this, durin" the past two years, Mrs Gibson exercised the privileges of a free selector—ploughing and cropping it. in the meantime, litzgerald obtained a license to occupy the land, but this he kept in his pocket until after Mrs Gibson in August, 1878 ploughed and sowed the land with wheat, when ho informed her that he had secured a title to the property. Negotiations ensued, Fitzgerald offering pensate Mrs Gibson for the labor -n nutting in the crop, bub declining payment for the seed ; or, on the other hand ?« ID^t 0 BUrrender all "ght to the crop if Mrs G. paid rent for the land. Mrs G rejected all these overtures, but she allowed Fitzgerald to harvest the wheat and then with the aid of eight or nine powerful countrymen, carried'iL oft. The Bench held that Fitzgerald had sacrificed his claim to the crop by neglecting to warn Mrs Gibson when she was ploughing and sowing his property, and the plaintiff was nonsuited with costs.