WIFE’S CLAIM

Grey River Argus, 23 October 1930, Page 4

WIFE’S CLAIM

£lO,OOO FROM HUSBAND A Prc-Marriage Settlement (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, October 22. An alleged pre-marriage contract, by her husband to settle on her all the income from his investments, was relied upon by Ilinemoa Corelli Charlotte Richards, in an action for specific performance, or for £lO,OOO damages, against David Richards, retired University Professor, of Otago, in the Supreme Court to-day, before Mr Justice Ostler. Letters of the proposal of marriage and the acceptance were read in ihe Court, in which Richards Wrote: “If you will only say the word, all the come from my investments shall be made over to you. to do as you 1 with. I want you to know that, at aa.yk rate.” Plaintiff claimed that this letter constituted an offer to her, that, in consideration of her consenting to marry him, the defendant would make over, or settle, the whole of the income from, his investments, which consisted of mortgages of land shares and debentures to the value of about £20,000; and that in pursuance of that contract, the plaintiff gave up her practice as a solicitor and was married to the defendant on February 19, 1929. The defence is founded on a number of grounds including the following: That no contract exists in writing; also that the plaintiff, four moutiis after marriage, withdrew from co-habi-tation. and lived apart from him, thug ! breaking the condition of the contract, that the relationship of husband and wife should exist in fact, as well ! as in name. Counsel for the plaintiff mentioned

; during the hearing, that the plaintiff i had married the defendant and borno him a child, and he contended that i they were entitled to insist that defendant should carry out his share of the contract. , In the cross-examination, plaintiff L . was asked: —“You say: ‘lt is you, and . you. alone, my love, I want.’ What does that mean?’’ The plaintiff replied that that meant* his love, and also what he possessed. J Tn answer to another question the plaintiff said:—“l told him, when he . proposed to me and stressed his fin--5 ancial position, that money did not alL ways bring happiness.” } His Honour observed that the finan- ; cial position of the prospective husband - was behind the mind of every woman. > It was legitimate for her to do so.