Mutual promises will always constitute mutual considerations. In such cases, the promise by one party is the consideration for the promise by the other.20 Mutual promises to marry render both parties bound by the contract. In theory at least, the woman, as well as the man, is liable in damages for a breach of contract. In Harrison vs. Cage,21 it was said: "Why should not a woman be bound by her promise as well as a man is bound by his? Either all is a nudum pactum, or else the one promise is as good as the other. You agree a woman shall have an action; now what is the consideration of a man's promise? Why, it is the woman's. Then why should not his promise be a good consideration for her promise, as well as her promise is a good consideration for his? There is the same parity of reason in the one case as there is in the other, and the consideration is mutual As for the case of the matrimonii praelocuti, that goes upon another reason, there being a feoffment of lands and a condition might annexed to it; but this here is upon a contract. In the ecclesiastical court he might have compelled a performance of this promise; but here, indeed, she has disabled herself, for she has married another. Then you have given in evidence any lawful impediment upon this action; as that the parties were within the Levitical degrees, etc., for this makes the promise void; but it is otherwise of a precontract."