Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1884-05-01
A WOMAN'S TRIUMPH.
The Wife of Wealthy New Yorker Sued
for Breach of Promise.

The Watertown, n. Y, correspondent
of the New York Herald says: 1t is not
often that breach-ofpromise case in
which a man figures as the plaintiff is
! brought to trial before the courts. Such
a one, however, was recently tried before
Judge Churchill, of the Fifth Judicial dis
trict, in WatertOwn. The case was that Of
Edward P. Bull VS.. Laura II. Littlefeld,
and may be outlined as follows:
The plaintiff, Edward p. Bull, is a we'll
| to-do farmer living in the town of Ellis
| burg, Jefferson county. His age is about
| 80 years. Mrs. Laura Littlefield. the de-
| fendant, is an intelligent and accom-
| plished woman of about 81 years of age.
| Her maiden name was Hungerford and
she was the daughter of Philo Hunger
| ford, late of Rural Hill, in the same
county. Both the plaintiff and defendant
were brought up within half a mile OF
each other from childhood, and were more
or less in each others company until the
/ fall of 1878, when the plaintiff proposed
and was accepted cOnditiOnally by the
| defendant, she telling him that she could
not be married before the death OF her
| father, who was an invalid, and was then
cared for by her, her mother being dead
and she the only daughter.
The attentions of the plaintiff were not
| looked upon with favor by the father and
unmarried brother of Miss HungerfOrd,
and, though the plaintiff accepted the
| terms of the engagement, his visits there
after were not as frequent as such a rela-
tiOn would warrant. Things, however,
went on smoothly for some time. In the
summer of 1880 the father died and the
! defendant, being much worn by caring
for him through his last illness, decided
to take a trip West for the benefit of her
| health. Previous to going, however, new
complications had arisen. The plaintiff,
who had looked forward to the death of
his intended father-in-laW as the time
when his happiness should be complete,
found his prospects suddenly vanishing.
The cause was the appearance on the
scene of new suitOr for the hand of Miss
HungerfOrd in the person of Col. Calvin
Littlefeld, of New York. Mr.. Littlefeld
is Teputed to be worth over $500, 900. He
is the owner of a handsome residence in
the town of Ellisburg, on the shore of Lake
Ontario, and his estate is one of the finest
In Jefferson county. Col. Littlefield spends
the summer months there and in winter
makes his home in New York. He is now
about 81 years of age. In the year 1879
his wife died, leaving a daughter, who is
now about 80 years of age. The Hunger
fOrds and Littlefelds lived near each other
when in this county, and as a cOnse-
quence the two young ladies were in each
others company a great deal and were
firm friends.
After the death of Mrs. Littlefield had
been sufficiently mOuTned the Colonel,
though crOWding 60, began to cast about
for another companion. His eye fell upon
Miss HungerfOrd, and he wrote her ask
ing permission to call, which was granted.
This came to the knowledge of Mr.. Bull,
and he objected. His afianced protested
that it meant nothing, but he was not
satisfied. A letter was written by him to
Mr.. Littlefield requesting him not to call,
as he had been told he might. This led to
trouble. Miss HungerfOrd had told him
she would never marry man who had no
more confidence in her than that, so the
engagement was broken off. The pair
exchanged letters and returned the pres
ents that each had given the other. In
November, 1881. Miss HungerfOrd went
West, returning in the spring of 1882.
During her stay two letters Of a friendly
nature passed between her and the plain
tiff.
When she returned she was met in st.
Paul, Minn., by Col. Littlefeld, who ac-
companied her East. The marriage fol-
lowed soon after, Notwithstanding the
great disparity in their ages and her de-
claratiOns that such thing would never
be. The plaintiff, to whom Miss Hunger
ford had previously been engaged, claim
ed that the engagement had never been
broken off, and after her marriage brought
an action against Mrs. Col. Littletield for
breach of promise, laying damages at S10,-
600.
From the testimony of the plaintiff it
seems he thought that Col. Littletield, be-
ing wealthy, would settle the matter by
paying a satisfactory sum rather than
have his wife brought into court. This,
however, they did not propose to do, and
the case was brought to trial in the Cir
cult Court.
Eminent counsel were engaged on both
sides, and the case attracted considerable
attention. At 10 a. m. to-day it was con-
cluded and given to the jury, which, after
four hours deliberation, found for the de-
fendant.