The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1893-12-21
ENGAGEMENTS 10 MARRY.
wherein They Legally Diner From All
other Kinda OF Contracts

wherein They Legally Diner From All
other Kinda OF Contracts.
It may well DO doubted whether young
men generally In this state appreciate the
true condition OF the law in respect Of Inn
piled engagements Of marriage A recent
breach OF promise suit in Chcnango coun-
ty Is an extreme case ON this subject and
furnishes a fresh illustration of the legal
doctrine that no express promise or formal
language is needed in order TO constitute
a contract TO marry.
The plaintiff IN the case to which wo
refer was introduced TO the defendant IN
December, 1885. He told her no had long
wished TO make her acquaintance. He
was in the habit OF attending tho same
church and prayer meetings as she did
and frequently escorted her hcme. He also
took her 20 public entertainments occa-
sionally. This went on for moro than two
years. In the spring of 1888, the defend
antis attentions grew more marked. and
he went home with the plaintiff from
church nearly every Sunday and from
prayer meeting nearly every Thursday
evening and would often go into tho house
and remain with her, usually alone In the
parlor, until 10 or IL O'Clock. On one oc-
casion there was q conversation in refer
ence TO trip TO Europe. On another, the
defendant talked TO the plaintiff about
building house and asked her what
building lot she preferred
In May, 1888, the plaintiff told the de-
PENDANT that she had heard somebody say
that the only reason he went with her was
to please himself and see how big fool no
could make of her. She asked the defend
ant whether this was true and he declared
that it was not saying that no had adj
mired her from his first acquaintance with
her and that he had never met young
Indy whom he regarded more highly; that
he longcd to make her happy and would
always protect her The plaintiff respond
ed that she wanted to know whether he
was true, and ho replied that he had said
all he could TO show that he was true,
adding Ms he was leaving, IF live, Twill
mako you happy
1t Furthermore appeared on thetrtAi that
tho defendant had more than once told
the plaintiff that he did not believe in long
engagements, and that the plaintiff re-
ceived no attentions or visits from other
young men during the period in which the
defendant was in the habit of visiting her.
From these facts the trial court left it
TO the jury to say whether or not they
would infer that there was an engagement
of marriage between the plaintiff and the
defendant. The jury found in favor of the
plaintiff and awarded her verdict of 3d.
600, which has lately been affirmed by the
general term of the supreme court in the
fourth Judicial department.
II will be observed that there was no
suggestion or pretense on the part of the
plaintin that the defendant had ever in
express words either promised to marry
her or asked her TO marry him. The in
tent Of the parties was solely TO be inferred
from their language, not Amounting toau
express agreement to marry, and their con-
duct toward one another.
Tho leading case in this state ON the
same subject is Holman against Earle,
which arose in Brooklyn 20 years ago, and
went Go tho court Of appeals, whore the
opinion was by Chief Judge Church.
That great judge laid down the true
rule applicable to such questions as fol-
lows;
Contracts of marriage are unlike all
Others. They concern the highest inter
eats of human life and enlist the tenderest
sympathies of the human heart, and the
acts and declarations done and implied by
parties negotiating them are often CORE
spondingly delicate and emotional AS
of law the learned judge was clear
~ right In holding that no formal Lam
guage is necessary 10 constitute the con-
tract of marriage. II the conduct and dec
larations OF the parties clearly indicate
that they regard themselves ms engaged,
it is not material by what means they have
arrived at that state.'
The application of this rule TO the Che
mango county case led the general term to
affirm the judgment. A consideration Of
the facts upon which the jury found in ia
vor OF the plaintiff should suggest TO young
men that II they conduct themselves as
though they were engaged they may be-
come defendants in breach of promise suits
whether they have ever actually said any
thing about marriage or not.--New York
sun.