BREACH OF PROMISE.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 May 1920, Page 11

BREACH OF PROMISE.

AJ'J'KA'L AUAINST VERDICT. NKW KVIDKNX.'B DISCOVERED. An application lor a now trial lias been made io the Appeal Court in tho case of Claude. Ualfour (otherwise known as Carodus), of Hastings, am! Magdalene I'aton Ritchie, of Hastings. The case arose out of a 'breach of promise suit heard in Napier on May 1-, before His Honor Mr. .1 listit-u Edwards and a jury. Miss Kitcliie claimed to have, suffered damage by the defendant's breach of his promise to marry her within a reasonable linn-. The promise was alleged to-have been made, in March, and on various occasions prior and subsequent thereto. I'lainiilV claimed CIOUO damages. The defence was a total denial of any promise to marrv. The jury found for planitiir, and awarded her CIOOO damages, and. judgment was given • accordingly. Tile Appeal Court was asked to set aside this verdici., and order a new trial, on (lie grounds that the verdict of the jury was against the weight, of evidence, and thai the damages awarded tie.' phiiutilf were excessive.

Mr. 0. .I'. Skerrett, K. 0., appeared f»r the appellant, a in! Sir Joli 11 Kindlay, K.C., for the respondent.

Mr. iSkerrctt submitted that the statement of claim contained no allegation that the plaintilV had either requested Balfour to many her, or that she was, prior to the alleged breach, at nil times ready and willing to marry him. The matter was of importance, for Ihe point was: Was there a promise to marry oil ii fixed date, or a promise to marry on request? Although tho defendant had given Miss Ritchie several presents, he 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 a> wedding-ring the engagementring is most highly prized "by a girl." Sir .lolin Kindlay: They don't bother with engagement rings in Scotland. Mr. Skerrett said there were alleged to have been two promises of marriage—the first in 100!) and the next in 11)10. The second promise was alleged to have been made while tile parties were at Lake Taupo. It. was claimed that Balfour had said to Miss Kitehie, "1 want you to be my wife, Lena dear," and 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 laconic in the extreme.

Addressing the Court on behalf of the respondent, Sir John Findlay said the verdict of the jury was unanimous, anil Mr. Justice Edwards had refused to dis-

Inrb that- flirt. Counsel for the atlier side had dealt with this marriage von-, tract as though it yigrv a commercial eontract between two keen business men over a cargo of pig iron. .Juries were men of the world, and in dealing with questions of fact, were 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 to 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 ill-. Justice Chapman. His Honor said the Court had carefully considered the ca.ie, 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 ease could not be properly decided, without the letters ibeing considered, and, therefore, ordered a new trial, and in the circumstances allowed no costs of appeal.