Sullivan v. Hurley

• Decision Date: 01 October 1888
• Parties: SULLIVAN v. HURLEY.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

147 Mass. 387

18 N.E. 3

SULLIVAN

v.HURLEY.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Hampshire.

October 1, 1888.

Exceptions from superior court, Hampshire county; BRINGHAM, Chief Justice.

Complaint, under the bastardy act, by Kate Sullivan against Dennis Hurley. At the trial, the complainant introduced evidence tending to show that she was delivered of a full-time bastard child on February 28, 1888; that she had had sexual intercourse with the defendant on May 1 or 2, 1887, on the last of May, 1887, and on June 25, 1887, and that the child was begotten the last of May, 1887. The defendant denied that at the time mentioned, or at any time prior to June 25, 1887, he had been criminally intimate with the complainant. Unless it can be properly inferred from the letters hereinafter referred to, it did not appear there was any sexual intercourse between the parties after June 25, 1887. The complainant was allowed, against defendant's objection, to introduce in evidence certain letters from the defendant, as to which the court instructed the jury as follows: “The letters which were written by this defendant to the plaintiff, after the time within which this child must have been begotten, are not to be considered as evidence of the paternity of the child, unless you find in them some language which recognizes or acknowledges sexual intercourse between the writer and the girl to whom the letters were written, either before or after the time when the child must have been begotten.” The letters admitted were as follows:

“WARREN, August 17. DEAR KATE: I write to let you know that I am going to call to see you next Saturday night; so stay in the house. I'll leave here at half-past seven. I'll take a team. So I can't write much, as it is in the post-office I am write this. If you can, be alone, so we can have a good time and a good talk. I'll take the road to West Warren. So I hope I'll find you alone, so you can ride a little with me. If in case anything should stop me of going, expect me some night, Saturday. D.H., Warren.”

The material parts of the second letter were as follows, the year being agreed to be 1887:

“WARREN, December 10th, Saturday night. DEAR FRIEND KATE: I received your longed-for and welcome letter some time ago, the Saturday evening you posted it. I was glad to here from ye, two. I was expecting a letter so long from you. Had given up expecting it, as I made up my mind you were not going to write at all. *** Kate, you asked me if I knew your new brother. I see him the second day after he come. I like him better than Tim. I brought John up one Sunday evening to Warriner's, while I was milking. *** My brother is gone to work to North Brookfield the 1st of this month. They don't keep no man in winter where he worked here. Bridget's sister left here 1st of November, as Mrs. Warriner told she would not want her but until the 1st of December. Warriner and his wife were hopping mad as she did not stay the other month; but she got a chance of a place at Dr. Buck's and she took it. They don't be praising Bridget now, as usual, as her sister left. I don't go with Bridget, now about 2 months. Tom Connelly's wife looks as if she got a taste, as she looks so big; but I hope the cellar door did not fall down, and that nail go in her ass. Pleas write soon, and let me know the man's name you are working for, as I expect to go to see ye some evening after chores. But you need not stay in any evening expecting me, as I'll write when I am going. Out of 4 times I went to Ware to see you, I did not see you but once. But I'll try again and again. Good bye.”

The material portion of the third letter was as follows:

“WARREN, January 4, 1888. DEAR FRIEND KATIE: I received your letter and presents myself, and I thank ye ever so much. I don't know how I did deserve such friendship and kindness from ye whatever. It was my place to send ye the presents. But it is not for want of money or love that I did not do so. But my mind and time was taken up Christmas week about my sister Jane being getting married. She was married, after Christmas, to a Frenchman. He is a good, steady man, but he have a little impediment or stutter when he talks. But that won't injure him at night work whatever. They had not much of a wedding, but a few near cousins. I did not write any one in Warren but your brother Tim, and he did not go, as he had to work that day. I wish 2 of ye were living here in Warren untill we'd go for a sleigh ride to North Brookfield to see my sister, as she is keeping house of her own now. If ye would come down to Warren some Saturday night, we could go for a ride Sunday. She will give ye bed-room, or if ye would come down some Sunday to mass. We has mass, one Sunday at half-past 9 o'clock, and the other Sunday at 11 o'clock. Next Sunday, January 8, will be 11 o'clock mass, an so on. *** I sepose that bloody Frenchman is got a taste from my sister before now. I kept thinking of a taste all the week, because I knew it was going on some place. Katie, don't tell Mary what do...