BROKEN ROMANCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20902, 18 June 1931, Page 4

BROKEN ROMANCE.

BREACH OF PROMISE SUIT.

NURSE SUES GRAZIER

WOMAN LOSES THE CASE

Tlio trial of an action brought by Elsie May Rattray, of Glen Huntly, nurse, claiming £499 damages from John Ellen Walter, of Violet Town, farmer and grazier, for alleged breach of promise of marriage, took place in Melbourne recently before Judge Macindoo. Mr. Magennis appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. o'Bryan for defendant. Mr. Magennis said the parlies became engaged in December, 1929. Defendant purchased an engagement ring for plaintiff'in February, 1930. They planned a house on defendant's property, but shortly afterwards defendant seemed to bccomo anxious about his financial position, and it was decided to postpone the marriage from October until December. In August Walter told plaintiff tho marriage would have to be postponed for six months, and perhaps for two years, on account of tho depression. Ho also said that because he was engaged his parents made remarks when ho went to dances and danced with ono girl more than once. After some discussion plaintiff said to defendant, "Oh, well. Tell them the engagement is off." Defendant alleged that tho engagement was terminated at that time. Plaintiff contended, however, that it was understood by the parties that the engagement was continuing. Plaintiff in evidence said defendant had told her ho owned 265 acres of • land, valued at £3OOO, which had been given lrim by his father. Defendant had treated her affectionately after September. When she agreed to let him have the ring ho said, "Oh! You are wonderful."- In preparation for her marriage she had purchased articles costing £127.

Plaintiff was cross-examined as to certain letters written between the parties, and the purport of conversations between them. Plaintiff said that at no time was tho engagement broken by her, and that when she handed tho engagement ring to Walter she did so at his request and in order to assist him to raise money for repairs on his selection. Defendant's Version. Defendant said that shortly after his engagement to plaintiff he commenced the building of a home, but about two months later tho depression and the drought had so affected his interests that he had to discontinue the work. He told plaintiff that on account of the existing conditions there was no possibility of their being able to marry for two or three years. He suggested the wedding should be postponed, but no definite time was fixed. Later, said witness, be told plaintiff that tilings had become even worse, and asked "her to release him from his engagement. She appeared to doubt that things were so bad, and when later she visited Violet Town lie took her on a tour of inspection. At the time there was no grass to bo seen and sheep were dying everywhere. They talked matters over and he told her he had only 6s 2d in the bank. She then said, " You can have your freedom. Tho engagement is broken. Is it not hard, this is the second time my engagement has fallen through ?" In October he visited Melbourne and had a conversation with plaintiff. She appeared to be annoyed, and said, "Thero was no need to break tho engagement at all. I was prepared to wait." He said to plaintiff, "What did you break the engagement for?" and she Veplied, "You told me you were so poor." Witness said he asked for the return of tho ring,, and suggested that it should bo sold, and plaintiff should have the proceeds. It was arranged that they should take the ring to tho jeweller from whom it was purchased the following day. The next morning plaintiff handed him the ring, but two days later asked for it back, as something by which she could remember him.

Drought and Depression

Mr. Magennis: When did you begin to feel that you would like to get out of the engagement ? Witness: It came on very gradually. His Honor: What caused it—the depression or the cessation of your affection for plaintiff? Witness: Entirely the drought and depression. Your feelings for her were the same as ever? —Yes. Witness said that on the evening when he said he wished to end tlio engagement ho said, "I want you to roleaso me from the engagement." He did not think there was a need for any "palaver." He had lost n couplo of hundred lambs. His Honor: Did you think more of the lambs than of the woman whom you wero going to make your wife? Witness: Certainly not, but without money you can do nothing. Mr. Magennis: What did you mean ther when you wroto to her, "True love neve 1 dies; it is more lasting than life itself"

Witness: It was only a saying I had. His Honor: But yours had died.—Yes. His Honor, in giving judgment, said lie had had very great difficulty in defining the consistencies or inconsistencies in the evidence. Ho did not think he had been told exactly what happened by either party. Ho was inclined (o believe that what really happened was that in September the parties had agreed to cancel tlio engagement, and hoped that subsequently they would becomo re-engaged. Having regard to the view be had taken of some of the letters, bo bad decided that there must be judgment for defendant. Judgment was entered for defendant with costs.