Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-07-18 00:00:00

BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.

SHINE v. MURPHY.—This was an action for breach of
promise of marriage, tried at the Limerick Assizes on
Wednesday. The plaintiff was Miss Shine, of Limerick,
and the defendant was Mr. Nicholas J. Murphy, son of
the late Me. J. J. Murphy, of Cork. Mr. Clarke, Q C.,
desired the Registrar not to swear the jury for a while.
A conference then took place between the legal gentlemen
engaged on both sides, which lasted about ten minutes,
and the following jury were then sworn :—Thos. Bennett,
Richard Taylor, Thos. Fosberry, Hugh M'Gunn, George
G. Gubbins, William K. Sheehy, John C. Morrisson Jas.
W. Gubbins, Francis Drew, George Bennett, John S.
Dwyer, and John Ross. Mr. Deasy, Q C.: My Lord—l
appear for the young gentleman who is defendant in this
case, and I am happy to tell your lordship that we have
entered into an arrangement that will spare the parties a
public discussion, and save your lordship's time. My
client instructs me to express his deep regret that he has
been the occasion of any pain or annoyance to the lady
who is plaintiff, or to any member of her family. He feels
satisfied that this record is not brought for the pur-
pose of obtaining any pecuniary compensation, but the
friends of the lady have advised her that she ought not be
satisfied with anything less than a verdict for a substan-
tial amount, which would show the perfect propriety and
correctness of her conduct. My client authorizes me to
add to his expression of regret his testimony to the per-
fect propriety and lady-like demeanour of the lady in this
case. He entertains for her still, notwithstanding what
has occurred, the highest respect, and he feels that the
best and only reparation he can make for the error into
which he has fallen with respect to her, is to acquiesce in
the demand that has been made by her counsel and friends
on her behalf—to consent to a verdict for £5OO, and to
add to that his testimony as to the perfect correctnes,
and propriety of demeanour of the young lady. I can
also express my concurrence i❑ the testimony, as far as
I have become acquainted with the young lady in the
progress of this case, as well as that of my learned
friends. tinder these circumstance, lam happy to say,
that both parties will be spared the inevitable annoyance
that would ensue from a public discussion in court
upon a matter of so delicate a nature, and to apprise
your lordship and the jury, that we have entered
into an arrangement by which a verdict is to be
recorded. for £5OO, as damages to this lady. I trust that
no annoyance will follow to the lady from what has
occurred, and that she will be restored to that peace of
mind and happiness she deserves, and which I trust she
will enjoy for the future. Mr. Clarke, Q C.—l think it
right, my lord, to state at the same time, on behalf of the
lady, that in accepting this sum and the apology, it is not
accepted as damages for the amount of injury she has
sustained, but to mark the sense of the jury, of the learned
Counsel, advising this gentleman, and his own sense of the
impropriety of his conduct, and of the perfect propriety
of the lady's conduct in every respect.—The action was
not brought for pecuniary damages, but to show that
her conduct through the entire matter has been perfectly
correct, and that the whole of the unfortunate transaction
which rendered it necessary to institute this proceeding
has been the fault of the defendant himself. His Lordship
said he was happy that the mat ter had terminated to the
satisfaction of both parties. He thought it would have
been better if Mr. Clarke had said nothing about impro-
priety of conduct on the part of the defendant, as he
admitted the injury and was willing to make reparation.
Mr. Clarke—Of course I only say it as far as the extent
of the verdict consented to and the injury admitted by
him. The issue ;paper was then handed up to the jury,
who returned a verdict for 500.

TALBOT DIVORCE.