AMUSING BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume V, Issue 235, 1 August 1872, Page 5

AMUSING BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

At the Manchester Assizes, lately, a breach of promise case was tried. The plaintiff was a domestic servant named M'Leod, and the' defendant a plumber named Horrocks. Both were about tif ty years of age. The defendant had proposed to the plaintiff soon after the death of his second wife, and wanted to be married in a hurry. After some three years' courting, with sundry quarrellings, the plaintiff wrote, asking if it was true that he was keeping company with another woman. The defendant replied — " You said you would never mend my trousers, so I thought 1 had better look out for a wife somewhere else." The defendant gave evidence and said he told plaintiff that three months was long enough for a man at his time of life to court, and when the plaintifi demurred to this it " put a regular damper on him." " When I was wanting to be married, of course I told her that I had two or three pair of trousers that wanted mending — they were always out at the knees. She said she never could do nowt of the sort. I told her that all my t'other wives had done it." (Great laughter.) The jury returned a verdict for tha plaintiff— da mages, LSO.

The sum of L 3,000 was paid into the Auckland Provincial Treasury on the 28th ult., for publicans' licenses.

At the District Court, yesterday (says the SoutMrn Cross of a reGent date), the four jurymen impannelled to try the case of Glenny v. Morrison, consisted of two bulls and two bullocks. That is to say — two who were called answered by the name of Bull, the other two to Bullock. Two others were called who answered to the name of Bullen. The whole of the names had quite a beefy soend. It was a case in which land, cattle, docks and thistles were in dispute, and the names did in some degree appear to be suitable to the nature of the case.