BROKEN PROMISE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22205, 4 September 1935, Page 12

BROKEN PROMISE

YOUNG WOMAN'S CLAIM "GLORY BOX" CONTENTS DAMAGES ASSESSED AT £3O JUDGE'S COMMENT ON LETTERS An action for damages for alleged breach of promise of marriage was brought before Mr. Justice Smith in the Supreme Court yesterday. The plaintiff was Stella Lavinia Jack, aged 23, spinster, of Silverdalo, and she made her claim of £350 general damages and £SO for depreciation of goods obtained for a trousseau against William John Bridson, aged 25, of Atea station, Hero, near Gisborne, shepherd. Mr. Sir.ger appeared for tho plaintiff and Mr. Blathwayt, of Gisboruo. for the defendant. Tho plaintiff claimed that in January, 1933, the defendant agreed to marry her, and that, relying on this promise, she had made and purchased goods at a cost of £IOO for their future homo. On Juno 19, 1935, defendant refused to marry her, and broke oli the engagement. The defendant admitted ho had agreed un July 10. 1933. to marry tho plaintiff though not in January of that year. Ho admitted refusing to keep the agreement, but denied that, the plaintiff had suffered any damage. A Letter Quoted "Tho law allows a man to bo fickle," said Mr. Singer, "but that is a luxury for which he can pay, and for which ho ought to pay." The plaintiff had devoted four years to preparing for marriage to the defendant. A most allectionate correspondence was carried on between the parties until on Juno 19 last the blow fell. On that date tho defendant wrotf» to pluintifi : —"Dear Stella, —1 know 1 am a brute and worse than that. You will feel like shooting me, and 1 suppose 1 deserve it. 1 have met a girl here whom 1 havo fallen in love with and love as 1 have never loved before. I am sorry 1 have made such a mess, but, try as 1 would, 1 could not help myself. Deiendant added: "I have slipped a lot lately, and no doubt if you had heard some of the truths about me you would havo broken it off yourself." Mr. Singer said it was a case in which the girl had been exceedingly heartlessly treated. Buying tho Ring The plaintiff said she had known the defondant for 11 years, and had started going out with him in 1931. He was the only man she went out with. In January, 1933, they became definitely engaged, and he bought her the ring produced on July 13. 1933. Witness said she had in Court a "glory box" containing a great number of articles she had made or purchased. Some of the articles were such as were liable to go out of fashion. She had also purchased articles of furniture and made such things as vases and jams and preserves.

Mr. Blathwayt: Did the defendant at any time have any troublo with your mother?

Witness: Yes. She added that they I did not get on about May, 1933, and j her mother had ordered him out of the I house. His Honor: What was the reason of the troublo?—Because mother thought we should be engaged and 1 should have a ring. "A Change oI Heart" Mr. Blathwayt: What exactly is your reason for claiming £4OO? —The way ho treated mo. If he had asked me to break the engagement, it would Have been different. 1 would have agreed. Mr. Blnthwnyt said the parties had become engaged at a youthful and inexperienced age. The explanation of the breaking of the engagement was a perfectly honest one, namely, that defendant had suffered a change of heart. The plaintiff had actually suffered no real damage, as the defendant was not a man of substance. The defendant, in evidence, said all he had now was three horses and five dogs and a job at £2 a week and found. He contemplated earning £3 10s a week before he could get married. In answer to Mr. Singer, defendant said he was not engaged to the other girl, but hoped to be. His Honor gave judgment after going through the correspondence. The only question before the Court, he said, was the amount of damages. The official engagement appeared to have been brought about by the action of the girl's mother. His Honor's impression of the letters were that they were those of a farm lad, simple and healthy and honest. Ho was clearly of opinion that no special damages as such had been proved. Nothing like the sum of £350 general damages could possibly be awarded in this case. Ho thought the sum of £3O was adequate compensation, and he gave judgment for that amount, with costs on the lower scale, witnesses' expenses and disbursements to bo fixed by the registrar.