The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1882-06-27 00:00:00

BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.
FILIIRLII V. CLIME:KB. -DAMAGES, .Cl,OOO.

This wits an action for breach of promise of marriage,
which came terms the Quieen's Beech Disiston on Tuesday.
Tho der, ndant d.ni d toe "remise, or teat las haderong-
!Lilly refused to marry the plointill.—Mr. Q.C..
end Mr. Mclleuell appeared for the plentiff, and Mr.
Wad ty. Q C., sod Mr. llouitee for the defendent.—Mr.
Matthews. in opening the ewe for th• explained
that Mist Cites Marriott Piteous% his client, well the
deuehter co: en etc sinct residing et Sheptierd'e-bueb, end
tie defendant, Mr. John Witbam themence, as. the
grudeum of a builder whs at his dun% in February. IPBI,
left him shoot EI,OOO • year. It appeared an iittimacy
sprang up between the plaintiff ant defendant owing to
their resiteeces having been next door to each other,
which enabled them to meet and c inverse across the
garden wall. (Laughter.) Their affection spiedin grew,
and alter he plainuff's tither became ovrare that they
were in the habit of walking out t nether, he bad an
Interview With the defendant, sod it was agreed that
there oh mid be no formal enagement until the defend.
ant hut acquired his espectel fortune. He would
have to read some of the Islters for the per.
pus of preying the engagement and the brucn.
Waddy : I admit bib the ea.agement and the
brearb.—Mr. Justice Hawkins: Theie to Le chalice tel
eaythhteelee being a(reset upon.—Mr. Matthews said he
was afraid at present there was no chance. Ile a old have,
hiiwever, to reel a few lett,r., am-ng them being one
doted Cornwall, September. ISM addressed to " My own
darling Cl.• a.' aai eldoed " T.il desth and ever after,
your own Willy." At that time it was evident the
grinte-t affection emoted between the plaintiff and
dofendent, who corresponded with wit other by return
of par. On different eccamens the defendant gsve the
plaintiff t &Inside present', and on the death of his
grendfather • Lime.' enguenseut took place, but
tourds the clue of lest year the defendant Lettered
▪ nnewhat coolly towards the plaintiff, and some
c =plaint woo mane about it from the plaintiff, her
parsoto. tee mother particular'y, asking the defendant nut
to kill her daughter by inches, hat to say at uoCs if be
had ilectd-d not to marry her, the delendent protested at
that lirao he sow loved the plaintiff at much as ever, end
seat her acaid on New Year. Day,lBB2,beartar the inscrip-
tion in print, " Atter clouts endue's. Dave peeeed. Golden
sunshine comes at loot." The defendant himself wrote
at the sante time. " Within& 700 • happy new year,
earlint. With love feu Willy. I will not be home
until totenorrtw (Tuesday)" Tee &tendon% however,
never appeared on the following day, and anon afterwaida
• wrote laying he loved her uo louder, ape thereto,e the
t should end. The klainUff, se • noble-hearted
:1.:m.7).1% to believe that the defendant had written the
letter, and wrote to the defendant ultimo him to ear that
such wee the fact. The defendant, however, in a cold and
hoartiees manner, Wrote to reply that every word of the
letter was his own, and written at his own impulse. After
ouch treatment the plaintiff had had no other curio open
to her hut to ask the opinion of a jury as to the cold and
beanies' manner in which she had been treated. Ls to
the amount of damages, he was Instructed the defendant
wee U years of age, receiving rents seamanting to n 1101) •
year and an income of /Me years. assiataut to hia uncle,
who wee a surveyor and builder. The defendant wee also
retitled to a sixth part of the Internet upto £13.000.
Mite Gars Marriott Pdbesen, the plaintiff, in the c mare
of her evolencs, sell toot tie misrelate wu filet for the
J-nary, .0 it e 111Cila•:10 it. Ault s !thou: her know-
ledge defends it.* I. uleol, Ir, at... 1 her II i
to him. la Decembsr, Ft. it, the it f adapt stayed swiy
• great deal, wbicti ctueed her much dist:eu. When I
the defendant grew cool, and he behaved moos liko a I
hiend than a Wear, he explained that it Wee owing
to business on hi. mind. On the blowing dal she
called and asked the union why he was to rhatta.d,
but he replied be loved her as mach ea ever, and no one
wou'id come between them. Oa the 9th Jemmy she
reo.teed the following latter ‘—" Dear Clots—lt is
utiles, deceiving you or myself any more. I du DOI
love you any longer, and under thou circumstances
It ie worse than sin to marry. I am quite certain
we should never be happy together, and therefore I think
the enaeireteent hail better etel.—Youre truly, J. W.
CLUEING/ " In reply she were.° asking why he h 4
treated her so, and she sae sure he never wrote it from
his own heart, and that she was quite broken-hearted, as
her whole I uture was Gduid tip with him. In reply, the
defendant wrote, "Dear Mies Pulbeew —1 ere in receipt
of your letter, serf I assure you the letter I wrote woe
entir,ly my own, n ene else hating a mimic the matter.
lem out tin we should
consider the engagement quite at an end. No explena-
flea was glees why the defendant broke off the engage-
ment. Evidence having been given in snonort of thistle,
of the &tendant's means, and the defendant electing to
call no evidence, the eau was edjoarned
lOa Wedusisy the jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff
--damages. El,tlo.