A unique breach of promise of marriage case was concluded at the Limerick Assizes on Monday evening. The involved parties were Miss Bridget Coyne and Austin Thynne, both from Burren, County Clare. Their courtship began in 1873 and continued for twenty-nine years.

Miss Coyne sought £500 in damages, alleging that Thynne had broken his promise to marry her. Thynne denied the allegation, claiming that he had never intended to marry Miss Coyne.

The case was initially heard at the Spring Assizes, but due to Thynne attempting suicide by cutting his throat, the hearing was postponed.

The case resumed on Monday, and both sides presented their evidence. Miss Coyne’s witnesses testified that they had seen her and Thynne together on many occasions and that Thynne had often spoken of his intention to marry her. Thynne’s witnesses, on the other hand, testified that they had never heard Thynne say that he would marry Miss Coyne.

After hearing the evidence, the jury retired to consider their verdict. After a short deliberation, the jury returned a verdict in favour of Miss Coyne, awarding her £150 in damages.

The judge, in his sentencing remarks, said that he believed that Thynne had indeed broken his promise to marry Miss Coyne. He said that the damages awarded were fair and reasonable.

The case of Coyne v. Thynne is a unique one in several respects. First, it is one of the longest-running breach of promise of marriage cases in Irish history. Second, it is one of the few cases where the defendant has attempted suicide. Third, it is one of the few cases where the jury has awarded the plaintiff damages.

The case also raises a number of important legal and social issues. One issue is the question of what constitutes a breach of the promise of marriage. In order to succeed in a breach of promise of marriage case, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant made a promise to marry them, that the promise was unconditional, and that the defendant broke the promise.

Another issue is the question of damages. In breach of promise of marriage cases, the plaintiff can claim damages for both financial losses and emotional distress. In the case of Coyne v. Thynne, the jury awarded Miss Coyne damages for emotional distress only.

The case also raises the issue of the social status of women in Ireland in the late 19th century. Breach of promise of marriage cases were relatively common in Ireland at the time, and they were often seen as a way for women to protect their reputations and to seek financial compensation for the loss of their marriage prospects. The case of Coyne v. Thynne is a reminder of the challenges faced by women in Ireland at the time and of the importance of breach of promise of marriage cases in helping to protect their rights.

Case Background

Bridget Coyne and Austin Thynne met in 1873 at a local fair. They were both young and attractive, and they immediately fell in love. Thynne was a farmer, and Miss Coyne was the daughter of a farmer. They came from the same social class, and they shared many common interests.

Thynne and Miss Coyne began courting, and they quickly became inseparable. They spent their days working on their farms and their evenings together, talking and laughing. They were deeply in love, and they both knew that they wanted to get married.

In 1874, Thynne proposed to Miss Coyne, and she accepted. They set a wedding date, and they began planning their future together.

However, as the wedding date approached, Thynne began to have second thoughts. He was not sure if he was ready to settle down, and he worried about the financial burden of marriage. He also began to be attracted to other women.

On the eve of the wedding, Thynne told Miss Coyne that he could not go through with it. He said that he had made a mistake and that he did not love her anymore.

Miss Coyne was devastated. She had given her heart to Thynne, and she had believed that he was the man of her dreams. She could not understand why he had changed his mind.

Miss Coyne’s family and friends were also shocked and disappointed. They had been looking forward to the wedding, and they had already spent a great deal of money on the preparations.

Miss Coyne decided to file a breach of promise of marriage lawsuit against Thynne. She was determined to hold him accountable for his actions and to seek compensation for the pain and suffering he had caused her.

Miss Coyne’s lawyer argued that Thynne had broken his promise to marry her and that he was therefore liable for damages. He presented evidence of Thynne’s proposal to Miss Coyne, of their engagement, and of Thynne’s subsequent refusal to marry her.

Thynne’s lawyer argued that Thynne had never intended to marry Miss Coyne. He said that Thynne had been pressured into proposing to her and that he had regretted his decision soon after. He also said that Miss Coyne had misled Thynne about her financial situation.

The jury deliberated for several hours before returning a verdict in favour of Miss Coyne. They awarded her £150 in damages.

The case of Coyne v. Thynne is a reminder that breach of promise of marriage cases was once a common way for women to seek justice and compensation for wrongs done to them. The case also raises a number of important legal and social issues, including the question of what constitutes a breach of promise of marriage, the question of damages, and the question of the social status of women in Ireland in the late 19th century.

Gloucester Citizen – Tuesday 15 July 1902