COMPULSORY MATRIMONY

Waipa Post, Volume 32, Issue 1777, 1 July 1926, Page 7

COMPULSORY MATRIMONY

(SENTENCE FOR BREACH OP

PROMISE. Mr Justice McCardle, in his Daedalian judgment on the law of engagement rings, says Mr Justice Parry in the Morning Post, points out that until 1783 the Ecclesiastical Courts could' decree specific performance of a promise to marry, the fearsome judgment running: for matrimony commanding solemnisation, cohabitation, consummation, and tractation, such as becometh man and wife to have."

Judge Hughes, author of "Tom Brown's School Day's," once threatened- a client, of mine with a similar order. Hughes was the Don Quixote of the County 'Court Bench. A distressed widow with an off-license claimed specific performance of a home-made agreement about the transfer of furniture and a promise to marry. The judge, in fiis impulsive way, at once took the woman's part. "Why d,oes your client refuse to marry the woman?" ill asked. "It is abominable!" I urged legal difficulties about specific performance of an agreement to marry. Hughes shook his head indignantly, and kept muttering: "I shall see that agreement carried—every Line of it! Every line of it!" and then adjourned for lunch. The judge's determined attitude made for peace. My client, an obstinate fellow, saw, himself being haled into church by the *High Bailiff and married out of hand, so he allowed me,to niake a fair settlement of all matters in dispute. When we returned, into court. Hughes was very angry about it, and said to me: "I wasn't frightened at your law, Mr Parry; I'd h av e had tha:fc agreement carried out! Every line of it!" What a dear old man he was. .