AN AUSTRALIAN BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1343, 21 May 1885, Page 1

AN AUSTRALIAN BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

The Leader sums up the result of the recent breach of promise case in the following manner : —"Samivel, beware of the widows," wes the advice of the elder Weller to his son, and Mr George Briggs, mining manager at Heathcote, has received a lesson on this point which is likely to impress itself on his memory. Melbourne juries seem always to have a partiality for the fair plaintiffs in actions for breach of promiso of marriage, in the case now under consideration there was something more to go upon than that casual reference to "chops and tomato sauce" which wrecked the happiness of the immortal Pickwick ; but it must nevertheless be admilted that the plaintiff in being awarded £250 damages was liberally dealt with. Mr Briggs, .an elderly widower, engaged aB his housekeeper a widow named Caroline Annie Flamstead, According to the defendant's statement, some weeks after she had been in his house they sat by the fire, it being a cold winter's night, and had four glasses of whisky toddy each. After the second glass the lady knelt by the fire, pulled the defendant's head down towards her and kissed him, saying that she had felt tempted to do this the first time they met. Rendered incautious by the influence of the whisky, Mr Briggs asked his housekeeper it she would not like to change her position for that of mistress. Mrs Flamstead declined the offer, on the ground that it wouid be displeasing to his family and because they were not sufficiently acquainted. According to Mr Briggs, the offer was never renewed, and it would not have been made at all but for the whisky. Mrs Flamstead's story was that the offer of marriage was renewed and accepted, <md that a date was actually fixed for the ceremony, after which the mature Lothario suddenly changed his mind. Evidence was called for the defence to show that the widow had repeatedly said she would never mairy the plaintiff, and that she had afterwards spoken of frightening something out of him, as she knew he would not face a judge and jury. It also appeared that Mrs Flamstead had surreptitiously regained possession of letters she had written to people on the subject. A sympathetic Jusgr, however, took the view that she wfte entitled to monetary compensation as a salve for her disappointment in the tender passioo, and the widower, who was held to have heartlessly trifled with her feelings, was ordered to pay £250. The moral of the story seems to be that people should keep in view Mr Weller's, senior's, sage advice, and that they should not, if they can help it, give a Melbourne jirry the opportunity of encouraging designing women to institute shaky actions against men whom they have not succeeded in dupiog to the extent of their desires.