GIRL'S ACTION FAILS

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 72, 16 November 1931, Page 7

GIRL'S ACTION FAILS

ardour that cooled POLICE CONSTABLE SUED FOR ALLEGED BREACH OF PROMISE HUMILIATION NOT REGOGNISED That there was no action in English law whereby damages could be _recovered for humiliation was the view expressed by Mr Gommissioner E. A. Mitchell-Innes, K.C., at the conclusion of an action at Birmingham Assizes In which Miss Phyllis Hamblet, 24, of Walsall, sought to recoVer damages for alleged breach of promise from William Henry Robinson, 27, a former Walsall tube-maker, who became a policeman at Blackpool. Opening the case for Miss Hamblet, Mr R. H. Norris stated that Robinson 1 admitted that he had promised to fj marry Miss Hamblet, but declared that Miss Hamblet was not ready and willing to marry him, and that the = engagement was terminated by mutuai consent either in January, 1930, or in June, 1930. Miss Hamblet was a tailoress, and met Robinson in May, f 1923. They both attended St. An- | drew's Ghurch, Walsall, and were members of tho same tennis club. They were in each other's company almost every d; y, and when Robinson was unemploye.l for two years plaintiff stuck to him. Robinson, proeeeded Mr Norris, became a member of the Blackpool Police Force, but he spent a large part of his leaves at Walsall, with Miss Hamblet, who went to Blackpool for a fortnight's holiday in 1929, and also went on day excursions to see defendant. When Robinson went home to Walsall at Easter, 1928, an engagement ring was chosen and presented to Miss Hamblet. On Most Affectionate Terms. There was voluminous correspondence, running to 300 letters from de- ■ fendant in the space of two years, and letters showed that down to December 30, 1929, the parties were on the most affectionate terms. On December 20, 1929, continued Mr Norris, Robinson wrote suggesting a date for the marriage in the following December. On December 30 he wrote: "This is all the news now, so I will close with all my love for my own darling Phyl. Ever yours, Bill." Then followed* 15 "crosses." Foiir days later, added Mr Norris, Miss Hamblet was surprised -by a visit from defendant, who seemed reserved, said he was "fed up," and flnally re- j marked: "Well, I met another girl at \ Blackpool about two months ago, and I I don't know which of the two I like ] best." ; On January 7, 1930, Robinson wrnt.p. • "T lrvvp. -vnn nnri will slwavs rin

so. But at the same time I must admit that I love this girl here more j than ever I loved you, or ever could ! do now.- Please forgive me for break- | ing your heart, but believe me when I I say that my mother's is broken, too. j and that there are two in Blackpool \ already broken. This is all I -have to \ say now, except that I think the j Almighty would have done us all a j service if He had taken.me last year ! when I was ill, and although it is a great sin to say so, I wish He had done so now. — With at least a little love, Bill." Robinson, explained Mr Norris, married the girl he met in Blackpool! in December, 1930. Robinson gave evidence, and admitted being engaged in 1928 to Miss Hamblet. He stated that he gave her a ring, the value of which was £7 10s. When they became engaged they mutually agreed that if ever "they found anybody they liked better the engagement should be broken." The engagement was "only fairly happy." Miss Hamblet, added Robinson, often complained that he was not prompt in writing to her. He flrst met his wife about the heginning of December, 1929. When he told Miss Hamblet about the other girl she asked: "Do you want the ring back?" Miss Hamblet put the ring into the palm of his hand. Witness said: "Don't be sillyl" She asked! "What do you intend to do?" He replied: "I will write and tell you." Like Gther Girl Better On his return to Blackpool he wrote to Miss Hamblet and stated that he was prepared to marry her, but liked the other girl better. In reply he received a solicitor's letter in which he was told that to offer marriage in such a way was "only to add insult to injury." Between January 13 and February 18 there was no communication between them, but when he went to Walsall he saw Miss Hamblet and told her he intended to' do nothing. Miss Hamblet retorted that , she had not flnished, and would make him pay for it. He had never in terms broken off the engagement. Cross-examined, Robinson declared that he was on affectionate terms with plaintiff for seven years. Mr Norris: Were your letters ali humbug, or were they a true picture of your mind? — Witness: They -were true. Further cross-examined, Robinson added that if Miss Hamblet had written to him instead of causing a solicitor's letter to be sent, or even if she had apologised for sending the solicitor's letter, it might have made all the differehce. Mr II. A. Tuelcer, representing Robinson, submitted that Miss Hamblet maintained that she had been humiliated by what happened. If that . were so, contended Mr 'Tucker, she had done all she could to broadcast the fact by the proceedings she had taken. In his summing-up the Commissioner observed that it was sometimes said that the hreaking of a promise of marriage meant that the girl chiefly -suffered through losing her chances of a home. What kind of a home wouid this have been, when defendant said that he loved another girl ? The jury found in favour of defendant, and judgment was entered accordingly, with costs.