A BROKEN ENGAGEMENT.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 10561, 16 September 1910, Page 2

A BROKEN ENGAGEMENT.

SriT FOR RECOVERV OF RINC (Per Press Association.) Wellington, September 10.

The .story of an engagement ot marriage almost as abrupt in its origin as ill its termination was unfolded during the hearing of a civil action in the Magistrate's Court tn-ilav, before Mr W.'R. Ilasclden, S..M.

Frederick College, who described himself as a tailor's cutter, sued Sarah Cohen, stated to be a boarding-house-keeper, of Wellington, for the recovery of a diamond engagement ring or its value ({."22 10s). In his .statement of claim the plaintiff set forth that the ring had been detained by delendant since September 1. 1-le had asked her for it on several occasions during the present month, and each time met with a refusal. Xow he had reason to believe that the defendant was about to leave for England, hence the civil proceedings to recorer the gilt. The plaintill is a Jew and the defendant a Jewess. Mr C. 1!. Dix appeared for the plaintiff and Mr A. M. Hindmarsh for the defendant. Briefly, tiio evidence of College wa.s to-the following effect: He had been in New Zealand for the past eight or nine years, and was 36 years of age. For three and a-half years he had worked with a linn at Auckland. On the occasion of a visit to Wellington some time ago he made the" acquaintance of the defendant, and about four weeks ago came to take tip his residence in Wellington. While here he lived at the Albert Motel, and then .stayed at the house of Mrs Weigel, ladies' tailor, in Vivian street, who was a friend of his.

and wlio was also related to the defendant. ill' Dix (to College) : You proposed certain transactions with ilrs Weigel?— Yes. What was the condition of that transaction coming to fruition!-' —That I should take Kiss Cohen as my partner. The Magistrate: What a ridiculous thiny;! How old are you ? —Witness: Thii ty-six.—(Laughter.) Mr Dix: Did you become engaged to this lady?— Witness: Yes; three weeks ago. It was just the day after my arrival .

In, response to further questions witness said he gave the defendant an engagement ring, which he purchased front Mandel, Harris, and Co. for £22. The question was then put to witness as to why he broke off the'engagement. Witness: They (the girl's friends) wanted me to get married in n hurry. I got here on Thursday, and they wanted me to get married on Sunday. In fact, he said they told him after he brcko off the engagement not to go to the shop any more.

Counsel: TTad you got any money from Miss Cohen? —Not a cent. To counsel for the defendant: Witness said that when be left Auckland lie lifted the amount of his savings. Further questions elicited the fact that when he left Auckland plaintiff had deposited part of his savings witli a mi an whose Christian name he did not know, but he lived in Ponsonby. 11l consequence of this the defendant had to pay certain born-ding expenses m Hawera.

His Worship: f fail to see any shadow of lepal claim that this man has for the ring. I can't see how, if a man has'given a present, he can sue for the recovery of it. The whole thing has a very fishy look.

Counsel for the plaintiff suggested an adjournment that he might look into the legal aspects of the claim and obtain authorities in parallel rases which could he submitted to the court. An adjournment till to-morrow morning was agreed upon.