Shattered Courtship: No Actual Engagement: Reason Why Fishponds Plaintiff did not Succeed in an Action: How a Bristol courtship was wrecked was told to Mr. Justice Rowlatt, in the King’s Bench Division yesterday, when George Thierry Pinsent, a widower, of The Retreat, Winterbourne, alleged that his sweetheart, Miss Lily May Jefferey, a waitress at the Victory Cafe, Fishponds, Bristol, had given him up owing to slanderous statements made regard to him by Ronald Francombe, Frampton Cotterell. The words complained of were that the plaintiff had invited a married woman to go to London with him for a week and that he could have saved his wife’s life if he had cared to do so. Plaintiff accordingly claimed damages slander but the defendant denied using the words complained of. Mr. C. W. Jacobs (instructed by Messrs. Pomeroy and Son) for the plaintiff said that for several months prior to August 1927, he was courting Miss Jefferey. On August 24th she and her mother arranged to visit him on the following Sunday, but in the meantime, the defendant called at the cafe and made to Miss Jefferey the statements complained of with the result that the appointment was never kept, and all relations were broken off. Miss Jefferey repeated to several persons the statements made to her by the defendant, and the plaintiff accordingly brought action against her, but it was settled by an apology. His Lordship: “Was it breach o’ promise?” Counsel: “No; slander.” Counsel went on to state that the action resulted in the disclosure of the defendant’s name as the person who made the statements, and accordingly a writ was issued against him. Defendant’s reply was an absolute denial that he ever used the words complained of. Plaintiff’s Story: Plaintiff, giving evidence, said that his wife died in 1925, and a doctor attended her up to the time of her death. In 1927 he kept company with Miss Jefferev, with a view to marriage. When she and her mother failed to keep the engagement to visit him on August 27, he wrote to the young lady for an explanation, but could not get any reply. The friendship had never been renewed and Miss Jefferey was now being courted by someone else. Mr. Jacob: “And so your chances are lost? “: Plaintiff: “Yes: they are gone altogether”. Mr. E. H. C. Wethered (instructed Messrs J. W. Ward and Son), for the defence, asked “Were you engaged?” – “I was not actually engaged.” Miss Jefferey in the witness-box, said that the defendant went to the cafe and said to her “if you knew what I do about Mr. Pinsent you would not keep company with him.” Defendant then made the statements complained of. “I never went out with Plaintiff after that or answered his letters.” added Miss Jefferey. The Judge: “You did not inquire whether there was any truth to the statements?” Witness: “I did not.” His Lordship: “It isn’t wise to assume that everything you hear about people is true.” Mr. Wethered: “You know now that these statements about the plaintiff were untrue, but you have not renewed courtship with him?” — “No; because I am courting someone else.” Mr. Jacobs said that the damage caused was that the plaintiff had lost his marriage. The Ruling: His Lordship said the action could not possibly succeed. If these words were used, the plaintiff was very badly treated but the action could not succeed unless actual damage could be shown, or a criminal offence was imputed. If there had been an actual engagement, and it had been broken off by the alleged slander, it would have been different. Therefore, the action must be dismissed with costs.
Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.
Referenced
GRO0830 Bristol: Thiery George Pinsent: 1891 – 1967