SOCIAL EXPENSES.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 58, 9 March 1935, Page 17

SOCIAL EXPENSES.

BIG SYDNEY WEDDING.

CITY OF LONDON BANQUETS

(Prom Our Own Correspondent.)

SYDNEY, March 4.

In the annual accounts of the Corporation of London, recently published, appear-, two items on which a certain amount of public criticism has been directed. It appears that the reception and luncheon tendered by the City last year to the late King of Iraq cost over £2100 — cigars being put down at £114, and tin: menus alone, gorgeously decorated for the occasion, costing £105. Also, the banquet given by the City to the World's Economic Conference coat £2100, food and drink accounting for over £1000. People who cannot shut their eyes to the large amount of destitution and industrial misery still prevalent at Home are much distressed by these disclosures) and are asking bitterly why so much money should be wasted on luxuries while so many suffer for want. O:' the barest necessities of life. Of course, the controversy is endless and 'the problem practically unsoluble, and I raise the question now, not with any hope of answering it but because it has been asked with a good deal of emphasis in Sydney during the past week. Ashton —Anderson. There has been a wedding here —not an ordinary wedding, hut the sort of celebration" that provides all socially distinguished people, who have the least, chance of being invited, with eager anticipations for months before, and happy" reminiscences possibly for years after" The "parties of the lirst part" were Miss Irene Anderson and Mr. .lim Ashton, and to anyone who lias lived even for a short time in this city and kept his eves and ears open, the names are sufficient. Miss Anderson is the beautiful daughter of wealthy parents, and one of the most distinguished members of '-Sydney's "younger set." Her father, it is true, made his money "in trade" as the purveyor of a particularly attractive brand of hat to the Australian public; but as he made plenty of it, no one inquiries about the source and origin of the family fortunes. Miss Anderson's mother was the daughter of Sir John Lee, and a famous personality in our political world; and as Mrs. Anderson's sister is Lady Horden, there is no doubt about the family's social

standing. As to the other contracting party, Mr. Jim Ashton also belongs to a family about whose social and financial status thcro can be no possible question. The Hon. James Ashton started life as a newspaper editor and a disciple of Henry George. When fairly launched on his career he was converted into a bank chairman and an M.L.C. Now, having retired from active contact with public affairs he periodically writes long and serious letters to the "Sydney Morning Herald," and is generally accepted - as the natural guardian of all the most sacred traditions of colonial Conservatism. His wife, Mrs. Ashton, 0.8. E., is known throughout Australia- for her devotion to British Imperialisms she is known to Sydney as one of its most kindly and generous hostesses, and elie is even better known on every polo field in the State, where her stentorian cry, "Come on, Goulburn," has many a time rallied her four stalwart sons at the crisis of a hard-fought game and turned a doubtful struggle into a glorious victory.

Famous Polo Team. For though Mr. and Mrs. Ashton have undoubtedly distinguished themselves In other walks of Hie, their chief chum to renown, in the eyes of most Australians, is that they are the parents of the "Goulburn boys," Jim, Geoff., Bob and Phil, who a. few years ago toured the world as a polo team and proved themselves able to test to the utmost any combination of players that could be'fielded against them ill Europe, Asia or America. It is Jim Aehtou, the eldest of these young men, who married Miss Irene Anderson last week..

Of course the Ashtons, like the Andersons, are wealthy. The family has owned several stations, and the newlymarried couple will settle down on one of these, after their honeymoon which, by the way, is to be spent touring New Zealand. Under all these circumstances, it was confidently expected that the wedding, which in any case would be one of the most "socially important" functions of the year, would also be one of the most gorgeous and splendid.

Calculating Cost. Certain ungracious people have gone to the trouble of calculating exactly howmuch the celebration would cost, and how the money would be expended. Over 500 guests were invited, and it follows that the wedding breakfast and floral decorations would cost at least £1000. Each of these guests, both men and women, would need to be appropriately attired, and "wedding garments for such an occasion would range from £20 for the mere men" to as much as £100 ;i piece .for their wives and daughters This would incur a total outlay of, on clothes' alone from £10,000 to £15,000. Miss Anderson's trousseau, it is asserted, has cost at least £1500; and it is believed that the wedding presents represent at least another £5000 —that is, from the guests and friends alone, without counting the more personal and probably the more valuable i'vtnily giftfi. If you put these figures together, you discover that this wedding may have cost quite £20,000—and this may be an "inside figure". rather than an exaggeration. • Of course it is a large amount of money, and it is some consolation to reflect that even if expenditure on luxuries is not, - economically speaking, quite "sound," still it means the circulation of a large quantity of purchasing power and consequent stimulation of trade. If there are. still people who find themselves impervious to these arguments, I can only ask them to remember that last year the city of London j>aid £114 for King Feisal's cigars, and expended £2000 on "food and drink" at one enormous meal for the delegates of the World Economic Conference.