BREACH OF PROMISE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21142, 28 March 1932, Page 14

BREACH OF PROMISE.

TYPIST SUES A CLF.RK* (JUDGE AWARDS £l5O DAMAGES. «• VALUE OF A BROKEN HEART." Judgment was given by Judge Foster 5n Melbourne recently in a caso in which •JJjss Martini Edith Mortison, aged 23 jyoars, of Flemington, formerly employed as head typist in a suburban factory, Claimed £499 damages from Geoffrey Allan Dunn, of Seddon, a young clerk employed ill the Melbourne Public Library, for breach of promise to marry her. Plaintiff said that in December, 1950, she became engaged to~~dnfendant, and received an engagement ring. She assisted defendant to purchase a second-hand motor car, and contributed £lB toward flic instalments, Toward tho end of last year it was agreed that they should be married in March of this year. Plaintiff left her place of employment and made a number cf pnrchases for her trousseau. Preliminary arrangements were being made for the but on the evening of December 25, plaintiff told her ho did not intend to continue the engagement. There were, he said, plenty of other boys for her to choose from. Siuce then she had received

po communication from him. Defendant's, version was that plaintiff's lather sanctioned the engagement on condition that tho marriage did not take place before two or three years, because of plaintiff's age and the financial position of defendant, whose salary was £3 7s n week. Defendant denied that any deiSnite time had been fixed for the marriage, and stated that Miss Mortison had slent him only. £2 on account of instalment •on the car. At the time of his engagement ibis credit balance in the Savings Bank was Bs sd, and Miss Mortison insisted that he .should save up to £l5O or £2OO before they got married, so that they could pay a deposit on a house and pay cash for their furniture. A Number ol Quarrels. In December last, said witness, he and plaintiff had a number of quarrels, mainly over plaintiff's attitude toward defendant's mother. On December 15 plaintiff said her mother did not want her to piarry into defendant's family, and had threatened to wash her hands of her if she did so. On the evening of December 23, in consequence of the quarrels, defendant suggested to plaintiff that she should consider whether it would be wise $0 continue the engagement. He was leaving for his holidays, and asked her to let him know her decision by telephone when he returned in a fortnight. He heard no more from her until January 4, when he {received a letter from her lawyer. Counsel: Were you really in love with tthe girl/ Defendant: Yes. You really desired her ?—Yes. j,f* And respected her?— Yes. f And you believed she loved you ? —I had fcvery reason to believe so.

And you believed it was wise for the (engagement to be broken ?—ln view of jthe circumstances, yes. The Judge, after hearing further evidence, said he accepted plaintiff's version of the events. Her testimony of what had taken place on December 23 seemed to him to be much the more probable version, having regard to what had happened afterwards. It was inconceivable and utterly unlikely that if defendant continued to love the girl as he said he had done, he could have refrained from making any overtures in writing, or by telephone or in any other way. Assessment of Damages. 'As to assessment of damages, His Honor Said that some years ago a graduate of Melbourne University invented a scale for [weighing the evidence in breach of promise cases, but there were no scales which ;which would enable the Courts to determine the value of a broken heart. In this case there was the problem of defendant's position, with his small salary and poor prospects in the near future. Then there ,was the possibility that the girl might lie well rid of a man who showed himself pi be lacking in affection for her, as defendant had done.

Fortunately, His Honor continued, the girl was still young, and possessed of accomplishments which might well fit her for a better husband than defendant might have been. She was still two years short of the average age at which girls married in Australia. On the whole, he thought £.150 would be a reasonable sum to award plaintiff, and lie entered judgment for that amount, with costs to be taxed.