The Cellardyke Echo – 21/5/2026 – Issue 533

1901

Carnbee Literary and Social Union – The last concert of the season was held under the auspices of this Society on Friday evening. The entertainment was provided by a select company of instrumentalists and vocalists under the leadership of Mr W. Watson, Cellardyke. The small but very complete and effective orchestra consisted of first and second violins, ‘cello, cornet, piano, and bells, all in the hands of most competent performers. The vocalists, ladies and gentlemen equally, gave the various items on the programme with a musical ability and taste which was highly appreciated.

AN EAST OF FIFE SLANDER ACTION. A FAMILY QUARREL; EXTRAORDINARY ALLEGATIONS.

In Cupar Sheriff Court on Thursday the record was closed in an action at the instance of Mrs Helen Anderson McEwan or Paton, wife of and residing with John Paton, jun., farmer, Blacklaws, Anstruther, against William Smith, at present carrying on business as a greengrocer at 29 John Street, Cellardyke, concluding for the sum of £100 in name of damages for alleged slander. Pursuer, in her condescendence, avers that in the month of August 1900 the defender, William Smith, was employed as a cook aboard the steamer Largo Bay, and on or about the 20th of said month he went down to the engine-room of the steamer and in course of a conversation with Alexander Ramsay, the engineer, stated that the pursuer had given birth to a child before her marriage with the said John Paton, junior, and that in consequence of her condition pursuer had to leave her situation and go home to her father’s house, where the child was born, and that after her recovery she was put out of her father’s house, and had to be taken in by her father-in-law. The child referred to was pursuer’s eldest son, John. It is further averred that six weeks later the defender, in the public street, Anstruther, repeated to the said Alexander Ramsay the statements above referred to, and added that the birth certificate of pursuer’s son John had been forged. It is alleged that the defender circulated the said statements in Cellardyke, and several of the pursuer’s friends and acquaintances informed her of the reports affecting her character which were being talked of in the village. Pursuer goes on to state that on or about Monday, 15th Oct. 1900, the defender, along with his daughter Margaret Smith called at the farm of Blacklaws, and pursuer’s husband asked him to explain why he had circulated the stories complained of, and defender, it is alleged, then stated that it was true. Pursuer told him that. IT WAS FALSE, and went back to the house and brought and showed him the birth certificate of the said eldest child, John Paton, which showed that she was married to the said John Paton, jun., her husband, on 10th December 1876, and that the said John Paton, their eldest son, was born on 4th October 1876. Defender, however, is stated to have replied that the statement he had made was true, and added—” You may say what you like, but your son John is 25,” or words to that effect, meaning thereby that the birth of the said John Paton had taken place previous to the date of pursuer’s marriage. Pursuer says that the statements made were false and calumnious, and have caused her great pain and distress, and her reputation in the neighbourhood had been seriously injured by the defender’s unwarranted statements. In his defences, defender denies that he is a greengrocer, and explains that he is a fisherman, and resides at 29 John Street, Cellardyke. He denies having made the statements complained of. In his statement of facts, he says that his daughter. Margaret Smith, was for nearly seven years courted by the pursuer’s son, John Paton, farmer Blacklaws. They were engaged to be married. The wedding was fixed for 28th August 1900, a house was taken for them in Kilrenny, and the said Margaret Smith went to considerable expense in providing her outfits for the marriage, and at the said John Paton’s requests gave up business as a dressmaker; The said John Paton and his family, including the pursuer, had always been ON THE FRIENDLIEST TERMS with the defender. At the date of the alleged conversation on board the Largo Bay the wedding of defender’s daughter and pursuer’s son had been definitely arranged, and defender had no cause to speak ill of the peruser in any way. Shortly before the date fixed for the wedding, however, the said John Paton ceased to visit or have any correspondence with the defender’s daughter, and the wedding did not take place on the date fixed. The defender states that he believes the marriage was broken off at the instigation of the pursuer. The defender adds that he and his daughter called at Blacklaws farm on or about the 15th October to see the said John Paton and get an explanation his conduct, and to ascertain if he was still prepared to carry out his engagement. They were met outside the farmhouse by the pursuer and her husband, who refused to allow them to interview their son, and who both used the most abusive language to them, and stated that they would never allow their son to marry defender’s daughter. The pursuer also stated that defender had said that her son had been born before her marriage, but he had denied that he had ever made such a statement concerning the pursuer, and told her that he did not believe the statements. He upbraided the pursuer for encouraging her son in his HEARTLESS CONDUCT to his (defender’s) daughter, but denied that he had aver used the expressions complained of. His daughter threatened to raise an action for damages for breach of promise against the pursuer’s son, and he avers that the pursuer replied that she would soon stop that by raising an action against the defender for damages for slander. The defender’s daughter had since then threatened an action for breach of promise against the said John Paton through her law agent, and defender states that he believes the present action had been rated by pursuer to prevent, if possible, the defender and his daughter, who are in poor circumstances, and not able to risk the expense of litigation, from proceeding against her son. Proof was fixed. Agents –For pursuer, Mr J. E. Grosset, solicitor, Cupar; for defender, Mr T. D. Murray, solicitor. Anstruther.

ANSTRUTHER AND CELLARDYKE GOSPEL TEMPERANCE UNION. The ANNUAL TRIP of the above Union will take place on SATURDAY. May 25th. to Perth. Special Train will leave Anstruther Station at 7.54 am, leaving Perth at 6.30 pm. Tickets, Adults 2, 6d, can be had at Record Office and from members of Committee Juveniles 1s 3d, at J. Fortune’s, Cellardyke. Tickets can be had up to SATURDAY 25th, up to the departure of the train.

IN MEMORIAM. loving memory of Skipper ALEX. DAVIDSON, Cellardyke. “Lady of the Lake,” who was drowned at sea on 17th May 1891. He was the loved of all, yet none O’er his low grave may weep.” Inserted by his Sister.

THE CADDIE’S BURN. The Provost reported that Provost Thomson had called on him in reference to a nuisance that existed in the old Caddie’s Burn. It used to be an open running burn between Cellardyke and Anstruther, but some years ago is was put into a tile drain, and the old portion was left, and there is that bit open for abort 20 yards. Some parties are depositing all sorts of rubbish and Provost Thomson suggests that the burghs should agree to fill up the whole drain, putting in the necessary pipes, and making a nice broad walk. He had to advise the Council to do this. It was a nuisance, and both burghs were affected by it. Dr Wilson supported the Provost, and said it would be a very great improvement to have the burn filled up the whole way. Bailie Duncan said it should have been done long ago. It was a very nasty place, and the expense would not amount to much. It was unanimously agreed to join with Cellardyke on having the work done at the mutual expense of both burghs, it being understood that the boundaries of the burghs will be the middle of the burn.

At Cellardyke Police Court on Saturday, Thomas Tarvit, fisherman, was fined 5s, and 10s of expenses, for failing to comply with attendance order pronounced in February against his boy. He declined to give his consent to sending his boy to an industrial school.

Do you enjoy and follow the Cellardyke Echo and the work of the Cellardyke Trust?

There are costs behind everything we do, such as, Web hosting fees for this website which provides the weekly Cellardyke Echo and all the other info and research. Public Liability Insurance for our events such as the Sea Queen and the Phone Boxes. These are general operating costs which we cannot avoid.

If you are able to support the work of the Cellardyke Trust – Donations of any size would be gratefully received.

Our Account is called “The Cellardyke Trust (SCIO)”, Sort Code 83-15-08 – Acc No 00128815

Many Thanks