DEAD FIANCEE

Evening Star, Issue 21752, 21 June 1934, Page 2

DEAD FIANCEE

THE "GLORY BOX" CLAIM SUIT AND COUNTER-SUIT tPi* United P**s» Association.] WELLINGTON, June 20. The hearing of three cases arising out of the death of a young woman at a time when she was engaged to be married was concluded in the Wellington Magistrate’s Court to-day, before Mr H. P. Lawry, S.M. Thomas Wood, a labourer, who was engaged to marry Miss Ethel Tranter (deceased), claimed from her brother-in-law, Robert Leslie Chambers, a boilermaker, in whose home the deceased girl was living, the return of goods valued at £lO 2s 6d, which were in the girl’s possession at.the time ot her death. Alternatively he claimed the value of the goods, and in any case an additional £lO damages. Harriet Wood, mother of the other plaintiff, claimed from Chambers the return ot a bed mattress and an eiderdown valued at £9 15s, or else its value, plus £o damages. She said that she had lent the goods to Miss Tranter. In a cross action Chambers and lus wife Miriam Elizabeth Chambers, claimed from Harriett Wood and her husband, Ernest Wood, a storeman, £t>o for damages for alleged libel, holding that in January, 1934, the defendants falsely and maliciously wrote regarding the plaintiffs a letter to Mr and Mrs Tranter in England. The first two actions were heard on Monday and the libel action on Tuesday and to-day. . Giving his deeision in the cross action, the Magistrate awarded £2O damages and costs, totalling £9 /s 6d, to Chambers. In his opinion, lie said, the letter was a defamatory statement Mrs Wood admitted that when the letter was written' she was “ feeling sore, but when she had-time to consider it she had not withdrawn any of her statements until she modified them in court that day. The hearing would satisfy the Chambers that there was nothing with which to reproach themselves so ■far as the girl’s illness was concerned. The doctor’s evidence on that point must be accepted. In the action by Thomas Wood, Mr Lawry said that one article had been handed over, and gave judgment for £9 15s. the balance of the claim, plus £1 Is damages for the detention of the goods, and costs amounting to £4 16s. Chambers had taken it upon himself to send the goods out of his possession at a time when he knew that there was a legal claim pending for them. The Magistrate, in the claim of Harriott Wood, ordered the specific return of the goods within fourteen days, or alternatively the naymont of their value assessed at £7. As damages for the detention of the goods £1 Is was allowed, with costs totalling £2 IDs.