BREACH OF PROMISE.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 May 1920, Page 10

BREACH OF PROMISE.

API'JCAL AGAINST VKRDICT. 3CB\V KVIIWN'<;B DISCOVKKI'I). Aii application for a new' trial lias been made to the Appeal Court in the case of Claude Balfour (otherwise known us Ciivoriiis), of Hastings, ami Magdalene J'utoii Ritchie. of Hastings. The ease arose out of a. 'breach of promise suit heard in Napier on May 12, before His Honor Mr. .fustice Kdwards and a jury. Miss Ritchie claimed to have suffered damage by the defendant's breach of his promise i<> marry her within a reasonable time. The promise was alleged i,o have been made in March. l!)Ui, and on various occasions prior and subsequent ithei'eto. Plaintiff claimed CIOOO damages. The. defence was a total denial of any promise to marry. Tin; jury found for planitiir, and awarded her ClOOt) damages, and judgment, was given accordingly. The Appeal Court was asked to set aside this verdict, and order a new trial, on the grounds that the verdict of the jury was agauist the weight of evidence, and that the damages awarded the plaintiff were excessive.

Mr. 0. P. Skcrrctt, K. 0., appeared fur the a|)))ellant, and Sir.John Kindlay, K.C.. for the respondent. Mr. iSkerretl submitted thai, the statement of elainrcontained no allegation that the plaintiff had either requested Balfour to marry her, or that she was, prior to the alleged breach, at all times ready and willing to marry him. The matter was of importance, for the point was: Was there a promise to marry oil a fixed date, or a promise to marry on request? .Although the defendant had given Miss .Ritchie several presents, ha had never given her an engagement ring, nor had there been any discussion between them to account for its absence, ( 'l suppose," observed Mr. Skerrett, "next to » wedding-ring the engagementring is most highly prized "by a girl." Mir John Fiudlay: They don't bother with engagement rings in Scotland. Mr. Kkerrett said there were alleged to have been two promises of marriage—the first in .11)0!) and the next in The second promise was alleged to have been made while the parties were at Lake Taupo. It was olaimed that Balfour had said to Miss Ritchie, "T want you to be 1117 wife, Lena dear," ami that the answer had been, "All right, sonny. - ' If the statements regarding that dialogue were true, Balfour might just as well have asked the lady to pass the mustard. Both of the alleged promises were Jaconie in the extreme. Addressing the Court 011 behalf of the respondent. Sir John Findlay said the verdict of the jury was unanimous, and Mr. Justice Edwards bad refused to dig-

(urb thai, virijict. (.V.Jnsel for llic other side had dealt 'with this marriage contract. as thou#!) it iym a commercial contract .between two. ketn business men over a cargo of pig iron. Juries were men of the world, ainf in dealing with (|uestions of fact wre not embarrassed by legal formalities. The question before the jury was whether Balfour promised to marry the woman, and the jury decided. that he had promised. The evidence had lo be taken as a whole, and the whole of the evidence amply justified the verdict of the jury.

The judgment of the Court was read by Mr. Justice Chapman. His Honor said the Court had carefully considered the ca-jo, and the fact that certain letters were not before the jury. Due consideration of those letters appeared to be essential. It was sufficient to say that, in the Court's opinion, justice could not be done without giving the jury full opportunity to consider all correspondence. The Court was satisfied .the case could not be [properly decided without the letters being considered, and, therefore, ordered a new trial, and in. the circumstances allowed no costs of appeal.