A MODERN MISS!

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 29, 27 April 1927, Page 3

A MODERN MISS!

TOO MUCH CONSTANCY Inconstancy used to be blamed for lovers’ quarrels, and up till a tew years ago there was a popular song with the theme, “You’ve got to see baby every night or you don’t see baby at all.” But this is out-of-date philosophy to Miss Ruby Phillips, who told the Magistrate’s Court yesterday that the cause of her estrangement with William Sandham a mechanic was: “He was too constant: he came home every night.” According to the girl’s mother Sandham came “crying” to her and told her that she was the mother of “the sort of woman who breaks men’s hearts!” The disclosures were made in an action brought against Jean Reid, a married woman and mother of Ruby, by Sandham. He claimed £25 and costs, alleging that the woman had cast reflections on his morality. The occurrence caused a stir among the neighbours of Union Street, who overheard an argument between Mrs. Reid and Sandham. A number of them were called as witnesses for the prosecution. Mrs. Reid said that she had forbidden her girl to “go with” Sandham after Ruby had told her waat he had Bald. “There’s a lot like that nowadays,” said Mr. Schramm, for the defence, when Ruby had said that Sandham would not take “no” for an answer. Mr. Schramm: You didn’t want to get married, did you? Witness: No thank you! I’ve seen too much of married life. Mr. Schramm: Then you are wise, at an early age. “You can sometimes be too wise, commented Mr. J. F. W. Dickson, who appeared for the plaintiff. "That’s so,” agreed the magistrate, Mr. E. C. Cutten, S.M. Mr.-Schramm: Since this occurrence he’s got another girl and you’ve got another boy? Witness: Yes, and “the” young man! Mr. Dickson: Oh, the man you are going to marry? Witness: Oh no. Mr. Cutten (puzzled): Well, what does the “the” mean? Witness: Why. the only man I’ve ever lost my head about! Ruby said that Sandham called for her every night in his car and his constancy was the cause of the break. He had told her about “the child” evidently because his conscience pricked him. Summing up the magistrate -raid that the case might have been met by a fine of £5 for insulting language. As it was judgment would be given for plaintiff for £5.