PEARL CLUNG LIKE THE IVY TO HER SWEETHEART

NZ Truth, Issue 1187, 30 August 1928, Page 7

PEARL CLUNG LIKE THE IVY TO HER SWEETHEART

ON the case being called at the Auckland Supreme Court last week before Judge Reed, Lawyer Singer held Pearl May's brief. Lawyer Conlan appeared for the defendant, whose notions of court attire were, .to say the least, of it, somewhat informal. His appearance warrants description. His hair was long and exceedingly untidy; he wore no collar to his somewhat soiled white shirt, which was open at the neck, and, to all appearances,- he had come straight from the cowbails. In outlining the case on behalf of his client, Lawyer Singer described Churches' action m clearing out to Sydney as "heartless and unpardonable." When the lawyer wrote to him regarding his breach of promise, he did not deign to reply. Stressing the character of the defendant, counsel went on to add that last year he had been found drunk m his motor-car with some girls, had been fined a considerable sum and had his license cancelled. "Aren't you rather minimising the damages?" commented his honor. Lawyer Singer's reply was that it might not have been a very serious offence, but he wished to show the kind of person who was making allegations against his client. Then, turning to look at the defendant behind him, he remarked: "Is that his court suit?" and went on to indicate that this was one of the Agony Court tricks which" was' frequently practised by its patrons. "He's not even taken the trouble to shave or to brush his hair." "1 can't see him from here," said the judge. Pearl May, the plaintiff, proved to be a young, stoutly-built woman, twentysix years old; she wore a high white helmet and a striking brick-colored costume.

Churches' Rejected Fiancee Wouldn't Have Been Happy Asks For £1000 Together, Says Damages When Lover Runs judge, But Farmer's Conduct Away To Sydney Was Deliberately Without Leaving Any Word Dishonest In Breaking Off For Bride-elect His Engagement HIS PRECIOUST JEWEL COSTS HIM TWO-FIFTY OF THE BEST

She related that she lived with her parents, was a spinster and was employed as a tailoress. Up to December 29, 1927, she had known Churches for about six and ahalf years; he was at that time managing a farm for his parents, with whom he lived. He worked a farm and milked twenty-six cows, which, he had told her, were his own, and had bought a motor-car for £270, for which he paid cash. "How long were you engaged to him?" asked Lawyer Singer. Pearl replied: "I looked upon myself as engaged to him for four years previous to the public engagement, which was announced about sixteen months before we parted. He asked me to marry » him after he had known me six months." Then she added: "Everybody else did so, too." Asked if she had prepared her trousseau, plaintiff answered; "I spent about £50 on ray trousseau and I gave up everything for him." i Holding up a sheaf of letters Lawyer j Singer had' mentioned m his opening | address as beginning with "Dear j Pearlie" and signed by "Your man, Tom," with a lot of crosses appended at the finish, Pearl's counsel asked Lawyer Conlan if he would care to see them. "They might be interesting," was the rejoinder. . "As a matter of fact, they are very uninteresting," said Lawyer Singer. "But he vowed m them that no one else should have her." Continuing her story, plaintiff told how they had visited each other's homes, when Churches was accepted as the man she was to marry. Then, it being the occasion of her birthday on August 28, 1926, one of her brothers suggested that they should have a public celebration to announce the engagement. To suit the convenience of all parties, the dance was held m a hall on Monday, August 30. It must have been a real slap-up affair, to judge from Pearl's account of it. The pai'ents of the bridegroom-to-be and his three brothers were present, while he paid for the hire of the hall. On that auspicious occasion the engagement ring was placed upon Pearl's finger. The ring was produced m court and appeared to be a cluster of diamonds, which both lawyers examined with some interest. Lawyer Conlan remarked that it was not yet paid for. "Did the defendant at a later period say anything to you about money?" asked Lawyer Singer. ' Pearl replied: "The only com-

"A Great Shock "

plaint he made regarding money was that his milkman was not paying up what- he owed — he owed about £200."' "Was the marriage fixed for March?" inquired plaintiff's counsel. . The reply was: "No actual day was fixed, but it was understood that it was to take place m March. The arrangement was made m December of last year." But- prior to December 26 of last year, Pearl said she heard that Churches was going to Sydney. "When I heard this, I asked him, but he denied it, though I showed him the letters. "On December 29, I was out with him," continued the girl m the box. "It was a Thursday, the night before he went away. He arranged to meet me on the 31st. ... He was to come to my place and take me out on January 1 and 2, but I found that he had left for Sydney on the 30th. . . . "He knew he was not going to meet me " — an d Pearl showed signs of emotion. Lawyer Singer: Were you surprised when you heard he had gone? Was it a great shock to you? — It just about killed me! It was a great shock. I was ill for two months. At the recollection oj Churches' callous conduct, Pearl brought her handkerchief into play. ■ She went on to tell how she . had received a message which indicated that her man, Tom, had gone to look at a farm at Ngatea which his father wanted him to buy. "When did you find out that he had booked for Sydney?" questioned her counsel. "When I went down to the office of the Huddart-Parker Company, a weekafter he had left. He had booked his passage on December 16. I couldn't find out his Australian address." Did he leave you a message? — No, he wasn't man enough to say to my face that he didn't want to marry me. Then Pearl added: "His father said he'd gone to America; but m March -he came back." Lawyer Singer: Have you had any communication with him since December . . . of any kind whatever? —-I've seen him. Yes, we've passed each other, but I can't say if he has seen me or not. He has never recognized me ... or me him. Commencing his cross-examination, Lawyer Conlan asked Pearl . how -long she had been working as a tailoress; he desired that she tell the court exactly how long. Pearl replied that it might be twelve or eighteen months since she had worked as a tailoress. "What is your father?" demanded Lawyer Conlan. "A blacksmith," said the young woman.

(From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Auckland Representative.) "HE WHO LOVES AND RUNS AWAY, lives to love another day," was apparently the idea which possessed Thomas William Churches, a young farmer of the Tamaki West district, when he took it into his head to make a break for Sydney, leaving his bride-to-be m ignorance of his whereabouts. But it was a false move, for, as the wise man said : "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned," and when, after spending some weeks and £150 on his trip, young Churches returned to St. Heliers and ignored his late sweetheart, ,she took out a writ for breach of promise for £1000, as a salve for her blighted affections and feminine pride. She was awarded £250 with which to soothe her broken heart.

7,ni 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 u 1 1 1 1 ii i u 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n h 1 1 1 1 i i ii ■ 1 1 1 u 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 i n 1 1 1 1 1 1 ii 1 1 1 1 1 i « 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 "Your father .drinks a good deal, doesn't he?" persisted counsel. To this Lawyer Singer objected, and his honor was constrained to ask how such an allegation affected the issue. Lawyer Conlan explained that the status and conduct of the father must be taken into account. He mentioned two of plaintiff's brothers who had been m trouble and appeared before the court. Pearl, however, was not a young woman to be scared of lawyers. She raised her voice to retort: "Both those things you mention > have taken place since the engagement was broken. I was going to marry him and he was going to marry me — not my family." Judge Reed: "The matter of the brothers or the car does not affect the question." And he added: "You may be acting according to your instructions m dragging out the character of this girl and her relations, but it does not help the judgment for your client." "The question is," said Lawyer

Priceless Pearl

Singer, "if, after five and a-half years' association, the defendant didn't know the failings of the father." Pearl: "Excuse me! He knew all these things about my father when he got engaged to irie!" Lawyer Conlan: "Do you know a man called Forbister?" Pearl replied that she did; but she had never been out with him alone; he had worked for Churches. "I deny that he wrote me letters," she continued, . "and defendant has never taxed me with going out with him. He (Forbister) may have called at my house since the engagement was broken off. It wasn't to see me, though. He's friendly wilh my family as well as me. Defendant never grumbled about me going out, with him. He said he could trust me — and he knows he can." Later Pearl said she had met Forbister through the Churches. "Did you ever tell Churches that you thought Forbister a better mnn than he was?" asked Lawyer Conlan. "No, I never have," wa.s plaintiff's prompt retort. "Do you think I'd be engaged to a man six and a-half years jif I didn't think he was the better man?" Lawyer Conlan dropped Forbister at this stage and tried Pearl on another friend, David Franks. She admitted that she had known Franks for about six yeai's; he had worked for defendant. "Have you ever received money from him?" asked counsel for Churches. '<He gave me small money presents four or five times out of cheques for work he had done," answered Pearl. She went on to say that she had never had words with the Churches over this man; the money was for mending she had done for him. Lawyer Conlan wanted to know if Churches was acceptable m Pearl's home. She said he was.

She Was Annoyed

Has your mother never sworn at him? — I've never heard her. There had been slight rows, Pearl admitted, because her mother objected to him being out with "crowds" of girls. She had told, him so. "My instructions are," announced Lawyer Conlan, "that yqu threw a cup of tea m your mother's face." •- Pearl was emphatic: "That's a lie! We may have had slight arguments m the house when he Avas there, but the only row I had with my mother when he was there was when he lost his driver's license through being found drunk m charge of a car." As to the imputation that she had ripped her mother's clothes, this Avas untrue. Her mother had never "roAved her" when Churches was present. She had "got on to" Pearl, but that was because Churches had brought her home at all hours of the night. Giving further details • of her late loA'er's A r isits, plaintiff said he rarely came round to her home before nine, ten or eleven at night. LaAvyer Conlan: What AA'as he doing till so late? — That's best knoAvn to him! You believe, noAv, that he lied to you? — Certainly, I do. Did you tell him that he was a liar once? — You must remember that I gave him five and a-half of the best years of my life; he nearly broke my heart Don't you think that you have had a wonderful escape? — I don't knoAV if I haye. Counsel pointed out to Pearl that she. might have been married to an untruthful man, to Avhich she replied:' "Yes, but there are a lot like that!" There were Avorse things than being

untruthful, she thought. As to stopping him from going home, or hanging on to him when he wanted to go, that was untrue. On one or two occasions they had entered into an argument which had kept him later than usual. Pearl added; "If I was so bad, why did he stick to me for five and a-half years ?" Continuing his cross-examination, Lawyer Conlan received the answer: "He struck me, but it was only on the spur of the moment. It was bad temper. I -once accused him of drinking — and he said he hadn't and struck me. "You've got to give and take a little, you know." His honor interjected: "Perhaps the parties are Scots. I always understoodthat an exchange of blows was a sign of affection between them." "Didn't you say that if the son couldn't pay, you'd take it out of the father?" Lawyer Conlan asked plaintiff. Pearl's answer was emphatic: "I never said anything of the kind — that's a lie!" She admitted that she was annoyed when Tom and his father went to Syd-

ney; she regarded it as a breach of their engagement. "If Chrches had said to you: 'We are unsuited; I'm a rascal and unworthy of you,' what would you have said?" was a, problem put by Lawyer Conlan. But Pearl's laAvyer objected: "Hoav can she say Avhat she Avould have said?" LaAvyer Conlan put it another Avay: "If Churches had asked to be relieved of his engagement, Avhat Avould you have said?" "It's very hard to say," was plaintiffs reply. "'I thought such a lot of him:" "Well, what would you say if he asked you to marry him now?" persisted counsel. Pearl Avas not to l:'e trapped: " "Is that fair? I admit I don't feel the same toAvards him. Hoav could I?" Then, Avith some heat, she Avent on: "I thought the Avorld of him for five and a-half years — I looked after him, cooked for him, mended his clothes and scrubbed for him . . . and then he Avasn't man enough to tell me . . . I only knew him three months Avhen he told me that he had started on his own and the coavs Avere his." Questioned concerning Churches' car, Pearl replied: "He got rid of the car for a purpose." Whether it Avas insured, she could not say. As to his Avages, Avhich he had said amounted only to £1 a AA'eek, that Avas "for a reason." "Don't you think you are putting an exaggerated value on him?" LaAvyer Conlan inquired. Pearl Avas not decided m her reply. But she did know that his parents had taken a dislike to her and would do almost anything to get him to break off his engagemeijtf:, adding: "A woman at One-

hunga had been writing scandalous letters to Mrs. Churches about me." Pearl refuted the statement that the ring had not been paid for; she knew it had been — she had the receipt for it. In his opening address to the bench, Lawyer Conlan stated that the defendant m the case was the son of very old residents of the Tamaki district, who had amassed a considerable amount of wealth, but the son himself, counsel was constrained to admit, was very different; m fact, he was irresponsible. He did not like the way m which Pearl treated her mother. He had nothing. His motor-car had been smashed up the previous Monday. Judge Reed was seemingly not impressed. His honor remarked: "He can work for a few years to pay any damages that may be awarded against him." Lawyer Conlan suggested that plaintiff's action was due to an idea' of liquidating love with damages. He thought the reason there were so few breach of promise cases was due to the common-sense of the modern girl. Being called to the witness-box.

Thomas William Churches found the searching eyes of the bench turned upon him. He Avas intently scrutinised for a few moments. "That costume youVe got on; is that your usual best?" his honor inquired. "HaA'e you had no time to brush your hair or put a tie on?" The judge added: "I'm speaking of the disrespect shown to the court. . . . I'm not going to interrupt the proceedings to send him doAvn town to buy a tie." -LaAvyer Conlan explained that he had neA'er seen his client any different. Churches informed him" 1 that he rose at 5 a.m. and had to milk the cows before he came to court. Interrogated as to his finances, defendant said he Avas earning £1 a AA r e<?k and his keep as a laborer for his father. "I haA'e no assets at all.' I had a motor-car, but it got smashed up and there Avas no insurance on it. I have no money m the bank. I haA'e no coavs. ..-."'■ "Tell the court why you broke off the engagement," instructed his lawyer. "The girl," as he" called her, Avas very bad-tempered and sulky. She used to go out with other men and he had lost all affection for her. The line of evidence then went to reflect on plaintiff's character, both Forbister and Franks being named. Lawyer Singer objected, to be overruled by his honor. . Churches, Avhose manner Avas> one of boredom Avith the Avhole proceedings, continued: "I had Avords Avith her about going out Avith Forbister, but she kept on. I kept on complaining . . . and she said it was all right. But she kept on going out AA'ith him, even "after she had promised not to." As to Franks, defendant knew they

were friendly, as he could see by the way they went about. "I have seen letters he wrote to her when he was up-country. I didn't see any money, but she told me he had sent her some," said "her man, Tom." Lawyer Conlan: Did she get this for doing mending? — I saw very little mending done. Pearl's friendship for Franks, asserted Churches, led him to think that she had some affection for "the other fellow." It affected his attitude towards her. Regarding his visits to her home, Tom said he went there frequently; if he was busy, he arrived there late. "I always stayed there late, but I was not a willing party to that. There were a lot of times I couldn't get away." He would seem to have had a trying time, for he remarked (further to the retaining power of his lady-love) : "She used to sulk and get bad-tem-pered and stop me from going; she'd hold on to me for an hour or two to

Mother's Welcome

prevent me from going. . . . She wanted all her own way." All the discussion as to the intended marriage was to the effect that they would be married later on. It might have been about the time he went to Sydney "or a bit before.." "Were you always treated as a prospective son-in-law?" asked his counsel. "Not always," was Churches' answer. "Her father was sometimes intoxicated and the girl's attitude towards her motlier was very bad-tem-pered; there were rows every five minutes of t'he day. I have seen her hit hfl- mother'with her hand ancl throw a cup of tea over her." "Did her mother ever swear at you?" invited Lawyer Conlan. "Yes, she swore at me and chased me. She said: 'Go home, you !' " Tom was not very scared, however, for he added: "It was not very long before I went back." After a walk up the road, he returned. His Honor: Did you ever come to blows? — She hit me on one occasion, and I've hit her once or twice, but not hard. Lawyer Conlan: Why? — Because I couldn't get away from her. Lawyer Singer then took up the tale with the young man who had hit his way out of his sweetheart's clinging arms. Churches said he was twenty-seven years old and his sole earnings were twenty shillings a week. "Is that the largest sum you have ever earned?" asked counsel. "I have, I suppose, made as much as £7 or £S per week," was Tom's reply when the question was pressed home, but he said this was three years ago. It was, he further admitted, only during the last • three months that he had been earning his pittance of £1 per week. In fact, only since he came back from Sydney. "I thought so," exclaimed the

The Lawyer Knew

lawyer. "You were m possession of a herd of cows last summer?" "I sold the cows a year ago to my father for £200,". defendant announced. And lioav did you get the money? — In pieces ... as I liked. Churches: did not go on milking, he told the court; his father did that, though he AA'as fifty-three years old. His father had taken over the farm because defendant couldn't make it pay. ' » ' ■ "Who got the milk cheques AA'hile you had the cows?" he was .asked. Tom said that he-did, until he sold the cows to his father. As to his engagement to Pearlj he had decided long before August to break it off; m fact, three or four months after they had become engaged. LaAvyer Singer; Hoav, if tliat is so, did you say you would get married m March? — I thought things' might get better. ' Asked to explain about the farm at Ngatea, Churches replied: "I thought about going on one if I could." La\vyer Singer: It was discussed just before you Avent to Sydney? — Yes. "And who Avas going to buy the farm — your father?" Churches assented ancl admitted that he had told his sweetheart they would live there; "Do you think your family higher m rank and class than that of this girl?" LaAvyer Singer Avanted to knoAV. Defendant's lawyer objected to this question, but his honor said: "I can't stop it. There's no objection to asking that." Lawyer Singer repeated his question. Churches did not quite relish it; he hedged for a moment, then replied:* "I don't know. I think so." "Are there any of your brothers m

gaol?" .he was asked. He denied that he had any brothers m gaol, but a cousin had been an trouble. Lawyer Singer smiled as he announced: "There's one of them there now — 1 acted for him!" (Laughter.) "This car belonged to you?" pursued counsel. — "Yes."' You sold it? — Yes. Just after it was smashed? — Yes. "You should have sold it before," observed counsel. The car had been purchased by one Roy Garton. When the smash took place, Churches admitted that he was the driver. He was asked to explain how he came to be driving a car when he had no license and replied that he had his' license returned for good character. Questioned as to the incident which led to the charge of being drunk m charge of a car, defendant said: "I was intoxicated; I was not with the girl— just friends, boys and girls." What time- of night were you arrested? — About eleven. Churches explained that he was going to a party with some boys. They fell m with the girls and gave them a lift. • They were all going to the same party. "Were the others drunk?" asked Pearl's counsel. \ "They'd just enough to keep them happy," was how Tom expressed it. "Did Miss May object to your going out with girls when she heard of it?" Lawyer Singer wanted to know. Tom granted that she did. He had denied that he was out with the girls — he was only giving^them' a lift home. Counsel led Tom along the thorny path of cross-examination with considerable care to ask him: "Did you make an arrangement to meet Miss May the Saturday after you sailed for Sydney?" The defendant admitted that this was so; he had made arrangements to meet her on the Sunday and Monday, too. Lawyer Singer: Who paid your fare to Sydney? — 1 paid my own fare. , , . How long were you m Sydney? — Thirty- one days. Who paid your way m Sydney? — I did. What did your little trip cost you? — £150. "I'll leave it . at that," was Lawyer Singer's concluding remark. Re-examined by his own counsel, defendant told how he- had gone to Sydney to find employment as a taxi^ driver. He had tried hard, but could not get anything, and had thought if he did well he would go to America. His father came back before him, and later sent him £20 with which to come home. That Sydney Trip Referring. again to the ring, Tom explained that Pearl had- exchanged his gift for a more expensive one. She borrowed some money from her sister to pay the final instalment and he was to pay the sister back. This he had not yet done.. "That is what I meant by telling counsel I hadnt paid for it yet," he added. To his honor's question; "You weren't running away from your engagement?" Churches replied: "No." "Why didn't you stay longer?" The judge was curious. "My funds were finished," was the answer. • His honor was interested m the car and its sale; he asked: "For what sum was it sold and why?" The defendant said he had sold it after the smash for £25 and the insurance had run out. His father was then called. William Joseph Churches said his son was very much of a harum-scarum. He had experienced a lot of trouble with him one waj r and another. "He's a good worker when he's at it, but he's not very often at it," was his striking testimony. Father Churches went on to say that at present he was paying his son £l a week, which was about as much as he was worth. "I know nothing about my son getting rid of his assets before breaking his engagement, and my son has no. prospects of getting any money m the near future," was the .summary of his evidence. To Lawyer Singer, witness said that when his son was away he paid another man £2 a week; all that his son practically did' was to drive the truck. "Breaking the union rules, I should think," was Lawyer Singer's comment. "Did you know that < your ' son was going to Sydney without* one word to this girl?" counsel wanted to know. "No," was the reply. You mean to say that you didn't know he was leaving without a word to this girl? — I knew nothing about his business. Counsel's comment was: "You expect the court to believe that — I don't!" Robert Eccles' contribution to the story was, briefly, that he had been six motor-car trips with the engaged couple and only once had there been no row. He thought defendant was "one of the best." Robert, who brought his evidence to light with a certain amount of cerebral friction, applied with his nails to his' scalp, told Lawyer Singer that he was fairly friendly with Tom." . "If 1 tell you that he left for Sydney without telling the plaintiff, that he arranged to meet her the next day, that he intended to break off his engagement, would you still consider him worthy of your friendship?" asked Pearl's counsel. Robert's answer was "Yes." ■ ;

Jl!lllllllllll!l!lll!!!!!!llllll!!l!llilllll!l!l "I'm glad of your views!" wae Lawyer Singer's dry comment as he turned to his papers. In his address to the bench, Lawyer Conlan laid some stress on the poor finances of his client and, Indicated that if the damages against him wereheavy, he would have to go -bankrupt. His honor made mention of tfte trousseau, which would be all Out Of fashion. To this Churches' counsel replied that nowadays things could bo remodelled, he understood. "There's this about it," continued Ms honor. "This man has evidently got rid of all his, assets. and spends tho money on going to Sydney. In any case, he cannot be an undischarged bankrupt all his life." Lawyer Singer referred to Tom. Churches as. ah "obvious liar," who was attempting to blacken the girl's character —and that of her brothers and parents —oh unsupported evidence. He asked the bench: "Does it nox look as if the defendant's parents had said: 'If you break with the girl, we.. will look after ybu'?" Counsel terminated by asking for substantial dam- % ages. It was quite certain, m his honor's opinion, that the pair would not have been happily married, but the defendant's method of breaking it off .was deliberately dishonest. It also appeared that he had deliberate^' got rid of his assets.- The grave feature of the defendant's offence was the manner m which he broke it off. ' While it was not a case for heavy damages, they should be substantial, and he awarded Pearl £250, with costs to scale, against "her man, Tom." Pearl, as she hurried out into the sunshine later," 1 seemed quite pleased with'the conclusion of her case. ■ She had more or less of a congratulatory gathering with her friends be- . fore they all dispersed. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiniinniiiiiiin