EXTRAORDINARY BREACH OF PROMISE ACTION.
At the Liverpool Assizes, before Baron Pollock, an action was brought by Anna Rowlands, a domestic servant to recover damages from Stephen Amor, a butcher, in Birkenhead, for an alleged breach of promise of marriage. Mr Mattinson and Mr Dodd appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Segar forthe defendant. Mr Mattinson ■stated that the defendant in 1877 lost his wife, and the day after the funeral asked the plaintiff, who was her sister to come to bis house and look after his children. She did so and at the desire of the defendant afterwards gave up her situation and stayed with him permanently, attending both the children and the domestic affairs as w ell as the business. In this way she saved the defendant a large sum of money. About three months after the death of his wife the defendant urged tha plaintiff to marry him, but she declined on the ground that it was not seemly to entertain the proposal so early. Eight or nine mont bs afterwards, however, he renewed the offer, and the plaintiff then accepted him, and they became engaged. Defendant fcuok advantage of his promise of mar-
riage to plaint iff, the result of 'he seduction being the birth of a child. The judge asked if Mr Mattinson admitted the fact of the plaintiff being the sister of defendant's deceased wife. Mr Ma'tinson said he could not deny the fact. His Lordship then said that ended the case at once. A man could no more marry his deceased wife’s sister than he could marry his grandmother. I his was a matter of common knowledge and when a man could not legally marry a woman he had promised to marry there could be no action for breach of promise of marriage. The ease then terminated.
Mistress (to new arrival, who has been sent to put a letter into the lamp-post box): “ Why, Bridget, where have you been all this time?” Bridget: “ Where have I been ma’am ? Sure I’ve been with the lettherma’am.” Mistress: “ I know that; but what kept you go long, and why did’nt you put the letter into the box as I told you?” Bridget (with desperate emphasis): “ Why didn’t I ' sure enough ! Didn't I go to ivery wan o’ thiin, and the doors of thim boxes were all locked ma’am. I’m kilt entirely wid travillin’ round tho shtreets all day so 1 am.”
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBS18820610.2.18
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1085, 10 June 1882, Page 4
Word count
Tapeke kupu
405EXTRAORDINARY BREACH OF PROMISE ACTION. Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1085, 10 June 1882, Page 4
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.