BROKEN PROMISE COSTS £250.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18547, 22 August 1928, Page 10

BROKEN PROMISE COSTS £250.

WOMAN SAYS SHOCK “ NEARLY KILLED HER.”

(Special to the “Star.”) AUCKLAND, August 22. Before Mr Justice Reed to-day Pearl May, of Onehunga, sued Thomas W. Churches, of Tamaki, for £IOOO for breach of promise. Counsel for Miss May (Mr Singer) said that he could not imagine a more complete breach. The defence was tfiat plaintiff’s character, disposition and family circumstances were such that the marriage would be unsuitable and unhappy, but Churches had plenty of time to find out these things before the engagement. In September defendant was drunk in charge of his car, with a number of girls in it, and he was fined £SO, the report of the case showing that he had been on a “boozing” party with members of both sexes. His Honor: Aren’t you minimising the damages ? Counsel asked: “Is this the defendant in Sunday clothes, but in a dishevelled state?” to which Churches’s lawyer replied: “Yes, he’s better than I usually see him. I told him he was coming to the Supreme Court, and that he had better have a shave this morning.” In evidence plaintiff said that she was twenty-six. The engagement was celebrated at a party in August last, for which Churches paid. The wedding was fixed for March, 1928. In December she heard that he intended going on a trip to Sydney. He denied this on December 29, promising to meet her on December 31. The appointment was not kept, because he did sail for Australia on the intervening day. The shock nearly killed her, and she was ill for nearly two months. Asked by the Judge what were Churches’s objections to plaintiff’s family, his counsel referred to certain trouble her brothers had been in. Plaintiff interjected that this occurred after the engagement, and anyway, Churches was marrying her and not the family. The Judge: I shouldn’t think defendant would be very delicate about such matters, if he takes women out in a car when in a drunken condition. Plaintiff denied throwing a cup of tea in her mother’s face. She had always believed Churches’s statements till the Sydney trip, but now knew he had been a liar. Counsel: Don’t you think you are well rid of a man who is a liar? Plaintiff: You must remember that I spent the best part of five and a half years over him. She also denied keep ing him out late at nights when he had to get up to milk cows early in the morning. Churches had on one occasion struck her.

The Judge: Perhaps the parties are Scotch. I understand in parts of Scotland that is a sign of affection. Defendant’s counsel stated that Churches was the son of a very old Tamaki resident, who had amassed a fair amount of wealth, but the son was quite an irresponsible type of ''outh. He had certainly become engaged to plaintiff, but his affections had cooled off to such an extent as to constitute a breach of promise. As far as damages were concerned, he had nothing. He was getting £1 a week and his keep as manager of his father’s farm, but had a motor-car. Even that was smashed on Monday last. On defendant going into the box tho Judge said: “Didn’t you have time to put on a tie and brush your hair?” Plaintiff was awarded £250 damages.