Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1904-11-09
BREACH OF PROMISE
TIsAN EASY MATTER FOR AwoMAN
TO OBTAIN DAMAGES.


lantry Arc Sufficient Ia the Eyes Of
the Law to support Proof of n
Promise to Marry.
Ever since Margaret Gnrdyner and
her daughter Alice brought what is
reputcd to have been the first breach
of promise suit, against John Kcche of
Yppswych, showing that he, the said
John kechc, had received sum of
money ON condition of his marrying the
aforesaid Alice and that he had mar
rieN Joan BlOys, .'ageyne all good rea-
son and conscience" breach of promise
suits have been recognized among all
English speaking peoples. Lord Holt
enforced ii at common law, holding
that the wounded spirit, the unmer-
tied disgrace and the solitude which
world be the probable consequence of
1esertion after a long courtship were
considered to be us legitimate claims
for pccuniary damages as the loss of
reputation by SANDER or the wounded
pride III slight assaults and batteries"
These matrimonial contracts are sui
gencris. No grim visaged lawyer draws
up Il formal contract to be executed;
no notary prizes into the intents and
purposes of the parties and certifies
the same under his official seal; no go
between Pnndarus is present to hold
solemnly pronounce:
"a bargain made. Seal 1t, seal 1t.
I'll be the Witness"
No. In the vine clad arbor or behind
the protecting screens Of parlor walls,
i'll some shady nook or in the dim NOON
light deep down some lonely dell, "far
sunkcn from the healthy breath Of
morn and ewes one STAR" there these
engagements are softly whispered and
the contract scaled with kiss.
For these reasons, while the making
of the contract is question Of proof,
1t need not be proved in totidem ver-
bis and is often inferred from the ac-
tons, language and conduct of the par
ties, and it is difficult to tell under
what circumstances the court would
be justified in finding that promise
had been made. Many young man
not fatally bent on matrimony would
sometimes be surprised to find that
his language. intended only Us com.
plilnent to some charming damsel, or
his conduct, meant solely rs an act OF
gallantry, is, sufficient in the eyes Of
the law to support proof of promise
to marry.
A gentleman once concluded that 1t
would be very elegant and very
funny thing to send to his dulcinea
newspaper article entitled Love, the
Conqueror," marking it, "Read this"
The lady did read this, and when the
funny gentleman declined to marry
her she brought suit against him and
read, the article to the jury, who gave
her $4,000 damages. The supreme
court Of Illinois, sustaining the ver-
diet, said: ''The article may be regard
ed as the defendants own letter. It
doubtless contained sentiment which
he sanctioned, couched in language
more choice than he could compose.
twas his appeal for marriage. 1t fore
told In clear and emphatic language
his object and intent in his courtship
with her. She doubtless placed this
construction upon it, as she we'll might
do, and laid 1t aside as rare treas.
ure."
In n New York case it was shown on
the trial that widower, n pious elder
Of fifty-three years Of age, soon after
the death of his wife visited the plain.
tiff, a maiden lady of thirty, aud, TAX.
ing out a memorandum book, from
which he read, or pretended to read.
stated In confidential way that he
had noted down some requests made
by his wife four days before her death;
that 1t was something he could not
tell her now" but that she (the maiden
lady) would know some day." darkly
limiting, SO the lady took it, that the
deceased wife had requested the for.
lorn widowcr to tighten his grief by
| marrying the plaintiff. 1t was proved
that after this confidential talk there
were rides and drives together. fire.
| quent visits extending till late in the
evening, and. to cap the climax. the
widower told the plaintiff that after
the lapse Of year from the death Of
his wife (the widower's quarantine, 1t
scems) he intended to marry, and he
then entered into Il minute description
Of the lady he wanted to marry, which
description was an exact photograph
of the plaintiff. While we cannot but
admire the shrewd diplomacy Of this
willy widower. counting by dark lnslnu.
atoms and covert suggestions and not
committing himself by an open avow-
nj, yet, as the sequel shows, he ran
amuck of the doctrine of estoppel.
The sanctimon!ous Protcus forgot hts
Julia and found him another sweet
heart, and, knowing that he had be
come somewhat involved in his affaiS
with the plaintiff, he automatically un.
dertook to checkmatc the lady. Ha
'sold her that he did not want her PEG
pie to think that lie was paying her the
attentions Of Il lover so soon after tho
death Of his wife, and in order to allay
that suspicion he drew up note, In
which the plaintiff was made to say
that she regarded his visits as "simply
evidences Of fris ndshlp and nothing
more" and got her TO sign 1t. The
Jury found In her favor, and the court
of appeals Of New York upheld the yer.
diet.
In Connecticut case the defendant
had been heard to remark on his hap
piness when In plaintiffs company and
his utter misery unless in her society.
The parties had exchanged daguerreo.
types, the defendant had taught the
plaintiffs nephew to call him uncle
and had told the plaintiffs brother-in-
Inv that "all the counting was done"
little suspecting that the plaintiff
would take hand ut Counting" ID
the presence of judge and jury.
l The defendant afterward went on 4