BREACH OF PROMISE.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 3634, 21 September 1912, Page 4

BREACH OF PROMISE.

PLAINTIFF AWARDED £250 DAMAGES.

A STOREKEEPER'S AFFECTION.

m the Supreme Court- at Adelaide last week, be lore the Chid Justice, a claim for CIOOO was hoard for breaen of promise, the plaintiff being Mes.uFounUiin and the defendant Percy b.vmons, storcheapei\ both .M . iorgan. Counsel said plaintiff was helping in her sister' bam and beef shop, wuen defendant made love to her, and pr >- mised marriage. Subsequently she became a mother. Defendant said h© had taken a violent dislike to plaintiff’s people, and declined to tarry out the promise. A number of letters were put, in including the ioilow-

Aly- Dear Jessie. — I have felt so lonely and discontented all day, knowing 1 will not be able to see you this morning. The whole day seems to have dragged through. 1 expect you feel quite done up after your journey, but now you are home you can have a real good spell, which you must do. dear, for 1 want to see you t ome back looking real tip-top. So mind, darling, you take very great care of yourself, because, dear, I am counting the minutes until I see you back again. AJind, dear, that you do not get

“spooney" on any oi the Mount 1 orrcus boys, for, dear, you can rest assured I will be absolutely true to you while you are away. Dear, I woke up this morning, hut I felt that I could not get up to bid you good-bye. I felt like having a real good cry. and thought if I went to the train I would feel the parting all the harder. Dear, you will excuse this short letter. 1 Will write you six pages to-morrow ; so now, sweetheart, sending you all mv very fondest love and tlie whole of xny affection, besides 10,000 kisses, which I wish you were here to receive, f am yours, Jess darling, and yours alone. PERCY.

The Chief Justice said plaintiff ought to have known better than yielded to defendant’s persuasions. There was not the slightest evidence of immodest behaviour on the part of tho young woman. AYhat made it worse was that the defendant endeavored to take stops that were criminal in their character to prevent liability for liis own immoral conduct. It was a shocking case. There would be a verdict for £2.50 and costs.

One day a-collector called upon an artist to try to get him to settle a bill for picture frames. “1 am exceedingly sorry,” said the artist, “but I cannot settle this bill at present.” “Very well, sir. , When shall I call agani ?” asked the collector. "It seems to me,” suggested the artist, sauvely, “that it would hardly bo etiquette for you to call again until I have returned the present call.’’