ROMANCE BROKEN OFF

Waikato Times, Volume 113, Issue 18950, 20 May 1933, Page 12 (Supplement)

ROMANCE BROKEN OFF

In the background of a dispute in the Chancery Division over a man’s gifts to a girl was the talc of a romance which was broken off, says a London paper.

The case was that in which Miss Gladys Jones, of Wandsworth Common, claimed lliat shares and securities standing in her name and valued at £I4OO were absolute gifts to her by Mr Robert Bruce Agnew Wallace,, of Leatherhead, who asserted that they were given to her conditionally on their being married. Mr Mel ford Stevenson, for Miss Jones, explained that the parties had been lovers. When they met, Mr ' Wallace was married, living apart from : ~hlß wife, who divorced him in- July, 1981. .

The shares and securities were given to Miss Jones between November, 1926, and 1931, and her case was that they were gifts, and that there was no condition attached to them.

In May, 1932, Miss Jones and Mr Wallace became engaged, but, later, •he “broke it off.”

Mr Wallace, in evidence, declared there was a definite understanding from the start that they should get married as soon as lie was free.

“ Marriage In View.” The gifts were made to Miss Jones in contemplation of marriage and that condition not having been fulfilled, lie wanted the shares and securities returned to him. Mr Stevenson cross-examining: i suggest -Hiat .all these shares were given by you to this lady when you were trying to ingratiate yourself with her? —"No,” replied Mr Wallace. Were you hoping to make her your lover, and did you finally succeed in doing so?—I was hoping to make her my wife. ~ Mr Stevenson read a letter from Mr Wallace 'to Miss Jones after his wife had divorced him: "My Darling “Glad, This is the first letter I have written to you as a free man, and I am taking‘the earliest opportunity of asking you to be my wife, dear. It means

Dispute Over Man’s Gifts to Girl. Judge Decides They Are Not Returnable.

a good deal to me to be able to come to you at last and ask you to bo my wife."

Another letter from Mr Wallace began: “It Is idle for you to suggest now that we should continue to bo merely friends." Mr Stevenson: Do you say that this suggestion was made by a woman who had agreed to marry you? " I suggest that she had ohanged,” was the reply. Another Attaohment. Mr Wallace stated there was a formal engagement in May, 1932, but Miss Jones broke it off because she had an attachment elsewhere. Miss Jones maintained there was no condition whatever attached to the gifts. Mr Wallace said he "bought tho shares for her because he was very fond of her. She told him not to persuade his wife to divorce him, as she did not want to mar-y him. It was . never agreed that they should marry “as soon as he was free." Cross-examined, Miss Jones admitted that the reason she did not marry Mr Wallace was because she was fond of another man: Mr Justice Maugham, giving judgment, said he believed Miss Jones, and that 'there was no promise to. marry until after the gifts came to an end. They were not in the nature of a marriage portion, but were the generous acts of Mr Wallace.

His lordship made a declaration that 'the shares and securities were tho property of Miss Jones, and ordered Mr Wallace 'to pay the costs of the action.