BREACH OF PROMISE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21118, 27 February 1932, Page 2 (Supplement)

BREACH OF PROMISE.

HEARTLESS MAN'S ACT. DAY BEFORE WEDDING DATE. JUDGE AWARDS £2OO DAMAGES. Twenty-four hours before the time fixed for her wedding, for which all preparations had been made, a bride-to-be received a telegram from hex- fiance, which read " Cancel all arrangements. Write later. —Butter." The sequel to this action was heard at a Liverpool Court, when an action for breach of promise was brought l\v Miss Dorothy Houghton, typist, against Ernest Rutter, stated to be a garage proprietor at Hatchniere, Xorley, Cheshire.

Defendant did not , appear, and tho deputy judge, declaring that ho had behaved iu a most heartless and disgraceful manner, awarded Miss Houghton £2OO damages. Miss Houghton staled that she and Rutter first met six years' ago, and he proposed marriage and obtained her parents' consent on November 38. 1930. He gave her a ring which was his mother's engagement ring, and the wedding was fixed for New Year's Day, 1931.

Preparations were made for the wedding, Rutter choosing his niece for bridesmaid and saying his brother-in-law would act as best man. Miss Houghton issued 32 invitations for tho wedding, made, all arrangements for the wedding breakfast

and wedding cake, and her wedding gown was made, as well as the bridesmaids' dresses.

Plaintiff spent £2l 15s on these arrangements, and a further £l9 on her trousseau. It was arranged that they should live at a house attached to the garage at Hatchmere, and out of her own savings she spent £2B on furniture, which was sent to their prospective new home. Miss Houghton added that at the time of her engagement she was a typist in receipt of £2 5s a week, having held her position for 12 years. She gave up her job upon her engagement in order to pay her personal attention to the wedding preliminaries. " Two days before the day of the wedding,"- plaintiff continued, " Mr. Rutter visited my home and left in the evening apparently in good spirits and on affectionate terms with me." On the. morning of December 31 she was busy at l.ome making final plans when she received tho telegram cancelling the arrangements. Counsel for jMiss Houghton: "When you received the telegram did you in fact collapse ?—I did. Witness added that in the afternoon, in view of tho telegram, she and her parents sent out telegrams to tho invited guests and did everything possible to stop the arrangements for the reception and wedding breakfast. She also got into

telephonic communication with defendant's home at Hatchmerc, but he was out and the servant answered the telephone. Miss Houghton stated that sho waited, expecting to receive tho promised letter, But she heard nothing, and eventually put the matter in the hands of her solicitors. This was two months later, and although they wrote to Rutter they received no reply. Counsel stated that Rutter had put forward a defence in which he denied that he had promised or agreed to marry Miss Houghton, or that sho had suffered damage. Throughout there had been no explanation of his conduct.