A BIG CLAIM.

Taranaki Daily News, 2 March 1922, Page 5

A BIG CLAIM.

BREACH OF PROMISE. BEAUTY SPECIALIST GETS £BOO. By Telegraph.—-Press Association. Wellington, March I. The jury in the Winder case returned a verdict awarding plaintiff £BOO and costs. ’• One of New Zealand’s biggest breach of promise actions, in view of the damages claimed, £lO,OOO, was commenced at the Supreme Court in Wellington on Monday, before His Honor, Mr. Justice Hosking and a jury of twelve, the parties being Eileen Frances Tate, formerly in business in the city as a beauty specialist, plaintiff, and George Winder, gentleman, defendant. The body of the Court was crowded when the case op- .-i ed, and the women’s gallery, if not crowded, was very interested. Mr. T. M. Wilford appeared for the plainti if, and Mr. A. Gray, K.C., with him Mr. G. G. Watson, for the defendant.

PLAINTIFF’S EVIDENCE. Plaintiff, a fair young lady of attractive appearance, said that she entered into business as a toilet specialist in January, 1920. She first met Winder in the early part of 1920, having gone to his business premises to see if he had any rooms to let in which she might start business. He had none. On this occasion she was introduced by an agent named Samuels to Winder, whom she had gone to see in reference to the purchase of some show cases. No other discussion took place at that time. A few days later witness rang defendant up to tell "him that the show cases were too large. At a subsequent meeting, Winder told witness that he intended going home to Ireland. It transpired that witness’ father was born in the same place as defendant. The conversation turneli to music. Witness suggested that perhaps defendant would take his son and daughter Home, but defendant replied in the negative, saying that they were hostile to him. Witness asked defendant to visit her place because he said he liked music and she had a phonograph. Witness agreed to go motoring with him on the following Saturday afternoon, and they went to Mason’s Gardens. Defendant would subsequently meet witness, or she him, on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Saturdays. They were frequently together, and would sometimes go to tea at Scott’s in Manners Street. PROPOSAL AND ACCEPTANCE. Counsel: “I want to know if anything occurred in your rooms in June.” Witness: “les. He asked me for the third or fourth time to become his wife, and I accepted him.” Proceeding, witness said that defendant stated there was practically nothing to wait for and that he would be quite ready to marry her in three months’ time. Defendant did not want witness to remain in business if she became his wife, so she sold it. On August 29 witness went to Palmerston North, intending to remain there until defendant went up to make arrangements for the marriage. Witness’s ,mother accompanied her. At Palmerston North, witness mot, a Mrs. Macleay at the Commercial Hotel, early in September. Defendant came up at the end of the first week-end, and said that lie “could turn the key in the door of his business,” but he seemed to be in trouble about his home and his daughter, lie also suggested letting his house, and asked her opinion. Witness remarked that Mrs. Macleay be permitted to take care of the place while she and defendant were away on the honeymoon. “ACROSS THE WATER.” To His Honor: It had not been decided then where the honeymoon was to be spent, although defendant had told her that they would go across the water. Defendant, continued witness, stayed at the Club Hotel, Palmerston North. Winder had given two travelling trunks to witness for a birthday present, and had once sent her £2O by money order, telling her to cash it. In reference to the £2O. Mr. Wilson put in the following letter, dated October 15:

Dear Eileen,--While having a quiet rest after dinner something ran into my head that I ought to do, and on various occasions 1 thought the same. It is this: It must be costing you a great deal more than expected to wait so long, and with railway fares, hotel expenses, tips, stamps, etc., and perhaps your available cash may be locked up, so I thought I would send you a telegraph money order for £2O, and if it’s no use to you you cash it, and you can refund it when we next meet.--Yours sincerely, FLU'FFUM. KEWPIES AND BABIES. Mr. Wilford: “Do you remember the kewpie postcard you sent him with two kewpies on it?’,’ —“Yes.” Mr. Wilford: “He thought the picture of two kewpies was a picture of two babies?”—“Yes, that is so.” Counsel then read a letter received by witness from defendant in reference to the subject of babies. “I thought,” said the letter, “that that matter was settled, as 1 thought I’d had enough, as mine didn’t turn out a success, so we’d better leave that alone.” Continuing, witness said that defendant asked Mrs. Macleay to see the Presbytdrifffi parson and the Registrar with reference to marriage particulars. Defendant did not desire that Mrs. Macleay should say who the parties were to be. Defendant was very secretive about the question of marriage. His Honor; “Was he afraid of opposition on the part of the family? - ’ •I cannot say, your Honor.” Mr. Wilford: “Did he get on well with the daughter?” —“No, ho. was afraid of meeting Mrs. Macleay’s son.” “Was anj’thing discussed at Palmerston North'as to where the honeymoori was to be spent?” —“Yes, he said tha.v we could be married at Palmerston, North and go on to Wanganui and Rotorua. I suggested going to Brisbane to see my sister, and then we cpula continue our journey to Ireland, or .anywhere we thought we would like td> go, as there was no need to hurry back?’ Witness said that no date was (fixed in September for the marriage, aitoin October no time was fixed; in fact! defendant had never fixed any definite dav. In defendant’s letters he wouML refer to “a week” or “two weeks.” When defendant began making excuses.! witness wrote asking him if October 4