When a selection is to be made between things and discourses, no one should be blamed for choosing what seems to be the best. But in order to come to a conclusion on this subject it is not necessary to adopt the opinions of those who act or speak, but thoroughly to examine the source from which the deeds or statements are derived. Therefore We think that We should adopt as a law the custom which provides that where a promise of marriage is broken, certain penalties shall be imposed; for I believe that the law relating to this includes some very wise provisions, since while it only condemns him who breaks his word to lose a betrothal gift, or to return twofold its value, custom demands that he pay the damages and interest set forth in the marriage contract. And, indeed, it seems to me that this rule has a greater tendency to prevent the violation of promises of marriage, as the simple loss of a betrothal gift, by the person who gave it and afterwards broke his or her promise, or the restitution of double its value to him or her by whom it was given, is a punishment of such trifling importance that it only induces the person who desires to violate the agreement to do so; while anyone will hesitate to incur the risk of becoming liable to a penalty mentioned therein. Hence, being convinced that the infliction of a penalty will promote the observance of marriage contracts, We insert it in the present Constitution. I only see in the forfeiture of the betrothal gift an easy method of avoiding a marriage, but this is not the case where the payment of a penalty is involved, for the expense is greater than that set forth in the contract, and compels those who are unwilling, or are irresolute, to comply with what they agreed upon at the time of the betrothal. Therefore what has been confirmed by custom up to this time shall hereafter obtain the force of law, suits shall be determined in accordance with it, and whoever violates a betrothal contract shall be liable to the penalty.