LOVE TURNED COLD.

Auckland Star, Volume LVI, Issue 125, 29 May 1925, Page 6

LOVE TURNED COLD.

A SHALLOW ROMANCE. f SCHOOL TEACHER SUES j ENGINEER. £350 DAMAGES AWARDED. The sum of £330 damages was awarded Dorothy Barlow, an English school teacher, by his Houor Mr. .Justice JlacGregor in a civil action brought by c her in the fupreme Court at Wellington t for breach of promise to marry, against i Harry Hugh Johnston, au electrical en- c gineer in the service of the tramways j department of the City Council. air. 0. C. Mazengarb appeared on bo- . half of the plaintiff, and Mr. R. R. Scott ' for the defendant, who did not attend j the proceedings. t . c Plaintiff's statement of claim was to j the effect that on April 24, 1924, and on t other occasions till November, 1924, i plaintiff and defendant agreed to marry, < in token of which the defendant gave t plaintiff a ring. Plaintiff was ready to t marry defendant, but by cable from de- j fendant in Wellington to plaintiff in i London on December 5, 1024, the defend- j ant, determined the agreement on his j part, and absolutely refused to marry i the plaintiff. Plaintiff, in anticipation of < the marriage with defendant, resigned i her position as teacher anil expenCed moneys on a necessary voyage to Ens- , land and in the purchase of clothes and other articles for her trousseau. Plaintiff ' claimed: Loss of salary £150, expenses * of voyage £120, estimated loss on trous- '' seau £70, and general damages, in all ' totalling £740. ; Mr. Mazengarb, opening his case, said . that the plaintiff was a teacher in England, who had come to New Zealand . under the system of interchange. That ' she was considered a valuable teacher was shown by her engagement by the New Zealand Education Department to teach a system of instruction to subnormal children. She was then engaged to a man in England. She and defendant met at the house of a mutual friend. She made plain the fact that she was already engaged, but defendant and she became friendly, and in the end affectionate, and they pursued a courtship. A Trip To England. Plaintiff went to Auckland on her work in June, 1924, and letters of in affectionate nature passed between them, cno from :he defendant reading , : ••'I am looking forward to seeing that pretty tea-cloth you made for our home. The most wonderful thought of my life is you and mc in our home." This was a distinct statement of the engaged state of the parties. The only cloud on their happiness was raised by defendant's objection to her going to England to see her mother and clear up small investments there before settling down m Isew Zealand. She gave liim back the ring given her by the other man, so that he could have the satisfaction of posting it back to him, and after that defendant gave her a ring himself. On July 16 he referred to "baring their souls to each other in tLe fulness of their love," and referred to' the purpose of her visit to England as making the way clear' for 'their home together. There was a series of further similar letters, but in a letter dated July 20 there was a postcript, written in August, a passionate postscript, in which he. described himself as lonely and longing for the consumation of their happiness. The week after sending a cable telling her to postpone preparations (to which she cabled that arrangements at her end were complete), he cabled that prospects • were uncertain, and that- he was writing. She cabled her willingness to wait, but the absence of any terms of love in letters that came to her brought the truth home to her. She cabled asking if he would still marry her, to which he replied. "Cable received. Not marrying you. This is final: Sending your things." She had already completed purchase of her trousseau, booked her passage, and cleared up her affairs in England. Not wishing to appear foolish, she decided to return to Wellington. On her arrival she found that he had been telling her friends that they had never been engaged, and that the ring was merely a dress ring. She took this as a reflection on her honour, arid consulted a solicitor. To a letter 'mm the solicitor the defendant did not reply. She was drawing a salary of £400 while formerly in the service of the Education Department, and now was drawing £100 less in another position The defendant's early gentlemanly be- , haviour had ben such as to make his subsequent conduct the more of a shock.

Plaintiff Gives Evidence. Plaintiff gave evidence on the lines of counsel's opening. She had told the defendant of the engagement to the othe.r man, but ho continued his attentions till finally he persuaded her to break the engagement off and become engaged to him-. She wrote from every port of call on the way Home, and found live letters from defendant" awaiting her in England. She had been to Glasgow to see her mother, gathered her belongings, transferred her money to New Zealand, and booked the earliest berth she could got. When the affair was broken off by defendant she decided to come to NewZealand, as there was little to induce her to remain in Ensland. Mr. Scott contended that even had there been a promise to marry, the arrangement had been terminated by mutual consent, as after receiving the cablegram plaintiff had written: "You need not be afraid that I will bother you." Mr. Scott contended that the trip Home was unnecessary, and not due to defedant's action, but that plaintiff had pone to sleep her position with the London County Council. His Honor, summing up. said: "There were three questions involved: (U Was there a contract of marriage'/ (2) Did defendant break that contract? (3) What damages were, thereby caused to tho plaintiff? , "The first thing that strikes one is ; that defendant induced the. plaintiff to give up .1 former engagement, and jilt a former sweetheart in England. It is equally clear that he put this young woman to the expense of trous-seau, etc. j She prepared for the marriage, and he caused her to give up her position as a teacher in New Zealand. There is no doubt that the brusque and brutal way in which he broke off the engagement by cable must have been a source of great grief to the plaintiff, and his conduct since has not been such as to alleviate this. I am satisfied that this is a case for substantial damages, and I award plaintiff the sum of £350 damages and enter judgment for that amount with costs."