BREACH OF PROMISE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 119, 16 November 1911, Page 9

BREACH OF PROMISE.

WHY THE MARRIAGE DID NOT TAKE PLACE. .AUCKLAND, fttli November. A breach of promise action, brought) by Delia Josephine Dinan, aged 32, a domestic servant, against John Pea,rce, aged 31, and described as a member of the firm, of Pearce Bros., builders, painters, and plumbers, was before Mr. Justice Edwards and a jury oi" twelve, at the Auckland Supreme Court this morning. Mr. F. Earl appeared for plaintiff and Mr. Mowlem represented defendant. Plaintiff claimed £80 as special damages, and £501 as general damages. In reviewing the allegations contained in the statement of claim, Mr. Earl pointed out that the parties had been acquainted for nine years past, and, in 1905 last, they were engaged to b« married, the ceremony to place place within' a reasonable ' time. Though the defendant delayed and evaded fixing the eventful* day, be* ultimately arranged lust ' December to marry' the young woman in or about June, 1911, and plaintiff thereuppn purchased her troueBeau, made all arrangements' for the approaching marriage, and informed her friends.' Ol) 14th April last th© defendant, it was stated, alleged a very extraordinary thing — that' he had consul t<ed three medical men. and that they agreed that he was suffering from valvular disease of the heart. He stated that these medical men had informed him that he might drop dead at any moment, ' and! that.it was inadvisable for him to marry at " all. • The plaintiff thereupon agreed to the postponement of, the marriage, but, m« August, the* /dread and dire disease was still active, and defendant offered £200 as a sort of solatium. Plaintiff believed the representations, and agreed to accept the £200, but had ' received no portion of 't.' The plaintiff, It was- alleged, had" discovered , that the story of the heart ' trouble was a trick on t.ho part of the defendant to get rid of his obligation to marry. The claim mad« was for £80 spent on the trousseau and household requisites, and for iBSOI general damages, as compensation for .anguish, stress of mind, and. hu>niiliation suffered by reason of defendant's failure to carry out his promise. The chief points for the defence were : (l)'Thafc what the defendant had said about his condition of health was absolutely true ; (2) that the promise of marriage had not been broken by the defendant, but by the girl's own act. The jury, after a short retirement, brought in u' verdict far £250 general dwnugcSj aud £20 sjscM tknja^fg^