BREACH OF PROMISE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21580, 26 August 1933, Page 2 (Supplement)

BREACH OF PROMISE

AWARD OF £SOO DAMAGES DEFENDANT'S EXCUSE FAILS . " MONEY UP HIS SLEEVE " ■ Concerning the changed position of women in love affairs Lord Pitman made comments when directing a jury during the trial of a breach of promise suit recently in the Scottish Court of Session. " There was a time," Lord Pitman stated, " when a woman possessed nothing. Her ' face was her fortune, and nothing else. If she lost her marriage market she was at a loose end for the rest of her life. Nowadays the position of women is more independent, and consequently we hear less of breach of promise cases. Even though a woman may lose her marriage market, she is not thrown on her beam ends in the old way." ' -

The jury, after considering for 25 minutes, awarded £SOO damages to plaintiff, Catherine Ritchie Nicoll, aged 36, typist, of Dundee. She had claimed £ISOO against defendant, David Conacher, aged 38, salesman, of Edinburgh.

Miss Nicoll's case was that she and Mr. Conacher became engaged in 1917, and that, although she repeatedly asked him to carry out his promise to make her his wife,. he failed to do so. They' had corresponded on affectionate terms, and one pf Mr. Conacher's letters to her began, " My dear Kitty," and finished

" Nightie, nightie, fondest love and kisses, your aye, Davie." Mr. Conacher admitted the promise, but stated there was an agreement between plaintiff and himself not to be married until he was in a suitable financial position, which, he contended, lie had not yet reached. _ . Lord Pitman told the jury they had to decide whether Mr. Conacher lf&d proved to their satisfaction that Miss Nicoll agreed at any time that they were not to marry until he could afford to do so. Was the man to bo judge of what was best? Mr. Conacher in 1931 said he still wanted to marry Miss Nicoll, but the judge asked him how long was that going to last. His answer was when lie got enough to marry on, but, remarked Lord Pitman, that might go on to "the end of their lives. There was a certain discrepancy in tho man's evidence with regard to his financial position. He- stated that ho handed over a legacy to his aunt in various sums at various times over a period of years for having brought him up from childhood and keoping him during periods of unemployment. It was learned from his aunt that he did not give it to her until intimation of this claim was made. All that time he had his money up his sleeve.