BREACH OF PROMISE.

Taranaki Daily News, 2 September 1920, Page 5

BREACH OF PROMISE.

CLERK'S LOVE CHANGES. I i MARRIED ANOTHER GIRL. An interesting breach of promise case was heard in the Supreme Court at Christchurch last week, when a claim for £IOOO damages wa3 brought by Mavy ; Ann Sophy Gates, spinster, of Division Road, Riccarton, against Clifford William Henley, formerly clerk, of Nayland Street, Sumner. Mr. A. T. Donnelly; appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. F. W. Johnston for the defendant, the ease being heard before His Honor Mr. Justice Herdman and a jury of 12. At the outset Mr. Johnston said that there would be no defence. The matter was purely one of damages. The facts as outlined by Mr. Donnelly were that the plaintiff, who was now 22 years of age, became acquainted with the defendant towards the end of 1914, and kept company .with him until July, 1915, when he went to the front with the Sixth Reinforcements. There was then a clear understanding that they would marry at some future time. There was constant correspondence between them during 1915-16, until defendant returned to New Zealand in June of 1016. He remained in New Zealand until the following October, during which time they saw each other constantly; in fact, every day. In October defendant left for New Guinea, it being arranged that he would return in three years, marry the plaintiff, and take her back with him to New Guinea. He did not at that time give her a ring. During the rest of 1916, until April of this year, the defendant continued to write to plaintiff in very affectionate terms, and in August, 1919, he became definitely engaged to her. He instructed her to gej a ring from a local jeweller, which she did, and the engagement was published in the papers. PREPARATION FOR.WEDDING. In March last it was arranged that defendant should come to New Zealand and marry the plaintiff. The plaintiff made her preparations for the wedding, but in May defendant wrote from Sydney, whßre he was on a trip from New Guinea, breaking off the engagement, and telling her 9he could, if she wished, return the ring to the jeweller from whom it was purchased. As a matter of fact, Mr. Donnelly interpolated, the ring was not yet paid for. In his letter defendant omitted to mention that, on the day he wrote it, he married another girl in Sydney. In June he came to Chrißtchurch on a visit to his relatives, and told plaintiff that he was extremely sorry for the manner in which he had treated her, and that he was prepared to compensate her. However, he had gone back to New Guinea, where he apparently owned part of a rubber plantation. The defendant had thus for some six years taken up the plaintiff's attention, and kept her from entertaining any other offers. He had continued to Write affectionately to her right up to the day of his marriage, and Mr. Donnelly contended that, in view of the circumstances and the humiliation the plaintiff had suffered, she was entitled to substantial damages. The plaintiff gave evidence on the lines of her counsel's opening. The defendant, she said, had gone to New Guinea as assistant manager of a rubber plantation at a salary of £7 10s per week. When defendant wrote breaking 1 off the engagement, plaintiff cabled declining to release him, and did not discover that he was married until he came to New Zealand. In answer to Mr. Johnston, witness said that at the time she met the defendant she was about sixteen years of age, and he was twenty-one. When he came to Christchurcli he told her that he had been corresponding with the other girl for four years. CONTENTIONS BY COUNSEL. I Mr. Johnston, in addressing the jury,! stressed the lucky escape that the plaintiff had had from what would undoubtedly have been an unhappy marriage. If the defendant was as susceptible to tho fair sex as he apparently was, the plaintiff had not lost much, her only prospect being to be buried on a rubber planta-' lion in New Guinea with a husband earning £7 10s a week. As to the affectionate letters written by defendant, they were only a lot of sentimental rot written by a lonely man far from his friends. Apart from the damage to her feclinga, plaintiff had suffered little loss beyond what she might have spent in preparing her trousseau, etc., and Mr. Johnston considered the case was one for small damages • only. During the whole time the parties were acquainted they had kept company in person only about nine months, so that was actually the only period of her life that plaintiff had really wasted. In summing up, his Honor incidentally remarked that defendant had had the honesty to tell plaintiff that he loved another girl. "His Honor asked the jury to view the whole circumstances in a temperate manner, remembering that the defendant was not a rich man. The jury returned a verdict for £2OO, and judgment was accordingly entered for the plaintiff for that amount, with costs acc/>rding to scale, expenses and dißburßemittte to Ire fixed by the regisjxntk, " '"' "" ■ ~ .