"MONKEY HIPPODROME"

Evening Star, Issue 18393, 29 September 1923, Page 8

"MONKEY HIPPODROME"

ENTERTAINER SUED. " Apparently the monkeys aro not defending,” remarked Mr Justice Schutt, in the Practice Court at Melbourne, during proceedings arising from an action instituted by Ben and John Fuller, Limited, theatrical proprietors, against Frank Everest, vaudeville entertainer, for an alleged breach of agreement. Mr Eager, who appeared for the plaintiff company, was seeking an order that the defence bo struck out; and that the company bo at liberty to sign judgment for the relief claimed —£300 damages, and an injunction. Mr Eager said that interrogatories delivered to Everest had not been answered; and the application was in default of such answers. By an agreement dated January 16, 1922, Ben and John Fuller, Ltd., engaged Frank Everest’s Monkey Hippodrome Mr justice Schutt: That is not a corporation. (Laughter.) Mr Eagen No; but the plaintif! company claims an injunction against both tho’ defendant and his monkeys. They were engaged for the production of entertainment at tho plaintiff company’s theatre. The agreement by its terms purports to bo with the Monkey Hippodrome; that is to say, with Everest and his monkeys. It was signed “ Frank Everest's,” Tho engagement under the agreement was terminated by tho company in accordance with the aggeement, but it is alleged that Everest has broken a clause by having since appeared with his monkeys —(loud laughter)—at Footscray. Mr Justice Schutt i You say that the performance of these monkeys amounted to a non-performance of the agreement. (Renewed laughter.) Mr Eager: It is alleged that Everest threatens and intends to perform elsewhere, In broach of his agreement. An obvious Inference is to bo drawn from the fact that he has disappeared. In order to prove tho case Mr Fuller and another witness would have to be biought from Sydney, the Footscray Theatre would have to prove the breach, and it would have to ho proved that Everest received a letter terminating tho agreement. Mr Justice Schutt: You would have to call evidence to identify the monkeys. Mr Eager: Once a member of the troupe, the presumption would bo that a roonney would remain a member of tho troupe. Mr Justice Schutt: Once a monkey, always a monkey. (Laughter.) For the defence Mr Nathan said that it was thought that Everest was in tho country districts of Now South Wales, “ performing with these monkeys,” and that the papers had not reached him. An adjournment would enable further inquiries to bo made, particularly from the Customs Department, as it was understood that the monkeys entered Australia under bond. (Renewed laughter.) Tho application was adjourned for a week.