A fascinating account from the Cheshire Observer, 28 January 1882, of a claim for breach of promise and child support by a many-sistered governess ‘ruined’ by a member of the Stephen’s Street Club after eye-contact in Grafton Street followed by champagne at the Lincoln Place Turkish Bath Restaurant progressed to intimacy which may or may not have been consensual.
An interesting feature of the case is that the plaintiff represented herself for the first part of the trial, but not, alas, during the cross-examination of the defendant; that task fell to John Ross, Lord Chancellor of Ireland to be, who gamely stepped in when she was taken ill over luncheon.
“AN EXTRAORDINARY BREACH OF PROMISE CASE
THE PLAINTIFF CONDUCTING HER OWN CASE
On Saturday in the Irish Court of Queen’s Bench (sic), before the Lord Chief Baron, the case of Emily McDonald v Anthony S Hussey was heard. The plaintiff, Miss Emily McDonald, described as a spinster over 21 years of age, and by profession a governess, sought to recover damages laid at £2000 for breach of promise of marriage, and £250 for the support and maintenance of the defendant’s child. The defendant, Mr Anthony S Hussey, is a magistrate and a gentleman of considerable property residing at Westown, near Naul, in the county of Dublin. The statement of claim alleged that the defendant seduced plaintiff under a promise of marriage, that a child was born as a result of the intimacy, and that afterwards he refused to perform his promise, although requested to.
Mr Horace Wilson, solicitor, informed his lordship that he had been retained for the plaintiff on Friday, but since then he and his counsel had been discharged from the case. Consequently no solicitor appeared for the plaintiff.
The plaintiff said she was obliged under the circumstances to conduct her case herself, not having any professional assistance.
The Lord Chief Baron said the plaintiff had a right to conduct her own case if she wished.
The plaintiff, who stood at the Queen’s counsel bar, proceeded to state her case. She is evidently a person of education and refinement, and possessing considerable personal attractions. She came to the bar having in her hand a number of letters from the defendant, which she read in the course of her statement. Her demeanour manifested remarkable self-possession for a person in her position, and she narrated with clearness and considerable ability the circumstances on which she relied in support her claim. She spoke with a strong English accent, and is apparently about 23 years of age. She said she had been endeavouring for the last two years to bring the case into court, but had been prevented from doing so by the way the solicitor whom she had employed had acted.
The plaintiff in the course of her evidence said:- I am twenty-three years of age. In 1877 I was residing in lodgings, and maintaining myself as a governess. I was part of the time alone. Mr Hussey paid me great attention. He said he could not marry at present as he was dependent upon his father, but after his father’s death he would be able to marry whom he liked, and that he would marry me. I met him on several occasions, and he used to be always trying to make me yield to him. He said he was a gentleman, that his intentions were honourable towards me. At last I yielded to him. The child was born on the 3rd October 1880. Up to the time the child was born he always begged me to trust him. He sent me a few pounds before the birth of the child, but I principally supported myself up to that time. Since the birth of the child he allowed me about £3 a week, May the 8th being the last payment made by himself.
Cross-examined by Mr Murphy: At the time Mr Hussey was paying his attention I was in lodgings in Lombard-street, South Circular-road. Immediately after the baby was born I was in Grantham-street aas Mrs Elliot. I remained there for a month, and went to Sandymount, still as Mrs Elliot. One of my sisters lives with me. I am in a decline, and an orphan. I sought my sister because I was in distress.
Had you told a solicitor that you would bring the child to the union if Mr Hussey did not provide for it? No. Mr Hussey has been my ruin. I once went with Mr Hussey for refreshments to the Turkish Baths, but that was not on the occasion of our first meeting. My sister was with me. It was a few days after our first meeting. Our first meeting was a casual one, and we again casually met. It may have been on the second occasion that we made an appointment. At the Turkish Baths we had some refreshments. I think it was tea (Laughter).
But were you drinking champagne? – I can’t recollect. I don’t remember how long we were in the Turkish Baths. Mr Hussey saw us home. He wrote to me asking me to meet him, and I did so.
Where did you meet him the third time? In Kildare-street, and we went for a walk. It was not very late at night. It was on that occasion Mr Hussey had intercourse with me. He used violence towards me on that first occasion out in the country. I don’t know where it was.
Did you cry out for assistance? – I don’t recollect. I resisted.
On November 8th you wrote – “Dear Tony. Forgive me for not writing sooner. Ethel went to Limerick early to-day, and I had not a moment’s leisure. I will be pleased to see you on Saturday. We will be at the rendezvous at the same hour – Eight o’clock.’
Where was the rendezvous? – At Kildare-street.
Had he made you a promise of marriage then? – He had.
Have you a single line of the correspondence in which he even hints at marriage? – I have the letter in which he refers to the ring – which meant the wedding ring. (Laughter.)
And is that all the evidence you have? – I have my younger sister. He said his father had heart disease, and if the connection between us came to his knowledge, it might kill him. I stayed with Mr Hussey at a hotel.
Did you go on a second occasion to this hotel? I did, but I don’t remember if I stayed the night.
What hotel was it?- I don’t know the hotel. I know the locality. It was some hotel in Gardiner-street.
Did you often stay in a hotel with him? – I went with him wherever he took me. I don’t know where it was. I stayed with him several times in one house. Mr Hussey said he had taken lodgings for me.
Every time he met you did he promise marriage? – Yes. (Laughter.)
Annie Macdonald was then sworn, and in reply to her sister she stated: We first met Mr Hussey in the month of November, 1877. I met him in the street, I met him on several occasions in the street, and on one occasion he told me he would marry my sister.
In cross-examination the plaintiff said: I know a person named Cooke, who wrote me letters in November, 1877.
Did he ask you to make appointments with him? I think he did. I had business transactions with him.
Was it for business you met with him? I discussed business transactions with him.
What was the nature of the business? Private business.
So private that you cannot tell us what it was? It has nothing to do with that case.
Where used he ask you to make appointments?
I have no recollection. I used to speak to him at the door of my lodgings.
What was the private business? It was private.
You will give no other explanation? – I asked him on one occasion to take a letter to a club to Mr Hussey. I asked him to be a messenger.
Is that the business in connection with which Cooke made assignations with you? (No answer).
Lord Chief Baron (to witness): I think you ought to answer the question.
Witness: The private business was as to some property of mine – an article of jewellery which had been taken to a jeweler to value it, with a view to its being purchased by Mr Cooke’s brother.
Did he write several letters to you? – He may have done.
Were you living, shortly before the baby was born, with your sister Ethel? Yes.
When you were going into hospital as ‘Mrs Elliott’ did you not ask for a ring in order that you might appear to be a married woman? I did not. I was too ill to ask for anything.
Do you swear that you did not do so? – I never wished to appear as anything but what I was. When I went to hospital no one knew anything about me. The doctor knew all about me, for Mr Hussey had been speaking to him.
Did you ask while at Sandymount for a ring in order that you might appear to be a married woman? I have no recollection.
Was there any undue intimacy between you and Cooke? – No, never.
The witness then left the box, and obtained leave to read a letter of Mr Hussey, the defendant, in which he addressed her as ‘Dear Little Emmy,’ and asked her was he to understand from the fact of her having forwarded two of Mr Cooke’s letters to him that he was to adopt his style of correspondence. The letter went on – ‘I hope you are pleased with him, and that you enjoyed the theatricals. One favour I will ask you is that you will not send any more letters by Mr Cooke or any other messenger to the club.’
Mr Murphy handed in the two letters of Mr Cooke to the plaintiff referred to in Mr Hussey’s letter. The first was dated November 31st, 1881, from D’Olier-street, and it was the following:- ‘Mr E.A. Cooke sends his compliments to Miss Macdonald, and asked her to meet him at 6.30 instead of 7 o’clock, as he had to go to Blackrock at 7.30.’ He enclosed tickets for an entertainment at the Abercorn Hall, and offered to accompany her to it. The second letter was dated the 22nd November, and related to an appointment to meet him at Harcourt-street station.
The plaintiff, in reply to the Lord Chief Baron, said she did not go with Mr Cooke to the Abercorn Hall.
Miss Annie Macdonald, sister of the plaintiff, was recalled, and in reply to the Lord Chief Baron, stated that the defendant had interviews with the plaintiff at Sandymount both before and after his father’s death. On the last occasion Mr Hussey asked witness to go away with him, and on the same occasion he refused to marry her sister.
This closed the plaintiff’s case.
After the adjournment for luncheon, Mr Wilson, solicitor, stated to the court that the plaintiff felt ill, and was desirous of having professional assistance. She consequently had asked him to take up her case, and he had retained Mr John Ross as her counsel.
The Lord Chief Baron: For my part, I am extremely glad that she is now represented by counsel. If it had been so from the first it would have relieved me of a good deal of embarrassment.
Mr Monroe: I sincerely share that feeling, my lord.
Mr Anthony Hussey, the defendant, was examined by Mr Monroe QC and deposed: I am a member of the Stephen’s-green Club. I first saw the plaintiff on Grafton street. A friend was with me. Her eldest sister was with her, and they were going towards the north side of the city. I was going in the same direction.
What did you observe her do? When I was passing down Grafton-street I turned round and looked at them. They smiled. Then I passed on down and looked into a photographer’s shop. They were coming on the same way, and when they were passing – while I was standing at the shop – I turned round and looked at them again and they smiled. I then, after a little delay walked on in the direction in which I was going. I overtook them on Carlisle-bridge. When going across Carlisle-bridge pavement, on to Sackville-street, I repassed them and spoke to them.
Did they answer you? Yes, we stopped at the corner of Sackville-street and had a few moments’ conversation.
Did they make any difficulty about speaking to you?
Not in the least.
Do you recollect the substance of the conversation?
It was very short. I don’t exactly remember how it began, but the substance of it was to make an appointment.
Did they concede that to you? Yes.
Both sisters? Both.
Where was it made for and when? – For the same evening in Kildare-street. On that appointment being made, we separated.
Is there one word of truth in the statement that was made here on Saturday that you first met in the office at the Irish Times? – I don’t think I ever had been in the office of the Irish Times up to that period.
You are certain you never spoke to them there? – Perfectly.
Did you keep the appointment that night? – Yes.
Were both sisters there? They were both there.
Did anyone accompany you? – Yes; a friend.
How long did you continue with them that evening? What did you do, and where did you go to? – We went from the place of appointment to the Queen’s Hotel in Gardiner-street.
Both sisters? – Both sisters, myself and my friend.
Had you any refreshment? – Yes; we had supper.
What hour was it when they went with you to the hotel? – I think we met about nine o’clock, and it took us about a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes to get there.
Did you take them home again that night? After supper we drove them back to near their lodgings. We did not go quite up to them.
Was there anything said about meeting again? I think we made an arrangement to meet a couple of nights afterwards.
With both sisters? Yes.
Where was the meeting to be? In the same place, Kildare-street. We met again. I was alone on that occasion, but both sisters came. We went to the Turkish Bath Restaurant in Lincoln-place.
Was there any refreshment there? – A bottle of champagne.
You are quite sure it was not tea? Perfectly.
Did the young lady make any difficulty about taking it? – No, she took it. I made an appointment to meet her a night or two afterwards. She said her sister was going to the country, and that she would meet me afterwards. A day and hour was fixed, and the place was Kildare-street. I kept the appointment, and she came alone. We went to a hotel, and spent up to eleven o’clock there. Defendant deposed to an intimacy on that occasion.
Is there a particle of truth in the statement that on the first occasion you took her to a country place and used violence towards her? – That’s a lie. I met her afterwards at intervals in November and December.
Under what circumstances was the matter of a ring first mentioned? After she went to the hospital her eldest sister suggested a ring should be got for her, as the people in the hospital might think she was not married. I refused, telling her sister she could get it for her. I don’t know anything further, except that she wrote to me about it, and I again told her sister that she might get the ring, as she knew the size of her finger better than I did.
Is there a word of truth in the suggestion that it was to be a wedding ring? No truth at all. I supplied her with money whenever I met her afterwards, but there was not a word about the marriage.
Is it true that in November 1877, you were introduced to her sister Annie, and that you told her you would marry the plaintiff? It is a fabrication. I never met the youngest sister until they were living in Sandymount. I paid all the expenses connected with the birth of the child. Her allowance came to £3 a week.
Tell how the conversation about marriage arose in Sandymount? She asked me if I was going to make a settlement. I asked her how much she wanted, and she said £150 a year. I objected to that. She then said she would make me marry her, and I objected to that also. (Laughter.) Her younger sister was there, and it was the first occasion that I met her.
What did she say? She said that I ought to marry her (plaintiff).
What did you say to her? – Well, I don’t exactly remember what I said to her. I should think it was very much the same as what I said to the other one.
Did you on that or any occasion promise to marry this girl? No, most positively not. I never said anything at all about marriage. I continued supplying her with money up to the time she proposed a settlement. She threatened then to put the matter into the hands of a solicitor, and I went to Mr McGusty. I did not correspond with the plaintiff afterwards.
The evidence for the defendant being closed, the further hearing of the case was adjourned.
On Tuesday afternoon the action was concluded. The judge’s summing up went against the plaintiff, his lordship being of opinion that there was no corroboration of the alleged promise. The jury were locked up for several hours, and ultimately… gave a verdict for £250 to maintain the child.”
The claim for breach of promise of marriage was rejected by the jury. Both parties applied for conditional orders of appeal, but the case seems to have been subsequently settled.
Mr Hussey, a noted cricketer, married in 1885 – not to Ms McDonald. The ruins of his impressive mansion, Westown House, may be seen here.
Leave a Reply