ACTRESS ON THE TURF.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18705, 10 May 1924, Page 2 (Supplement)

ACTRESS ON THE TURF.

40RSES THAT DID NOT WIN. '- •* " ' TWO UNSUCCESSFUL BETS.

CLAIM FOR REFUND FAILS.

STORY OF WARNING-OFF ORDER.

Miss Evelyn Taylor, the music-hall artist, lias had an eventful career on the turf, both as a recehorse owner and in betting. Some .of" her experiences were revealed in the King's Bench, London, in March.

. Miss Taylor, who in private life is Mrs. Evelyn Rose Hargreaves,' sued in respect of her separate estate for . the . return of' £375 paid to Walter Manny, Stoke Newington, for betting transactions. Manny denied that two cheques for £175 and £200 were in respect of horse-, racing between .them as principals, and pleaded that the action was barred by the Gaming Act of 1922. and, the Civil .Procedure Act, 1883. He also pleaded that he acted as Mrs. Hargreaves' agent, malting bets on her behalf. _ * Mr. Gilbert Beyfus, for plaintiff, said that Mrs. Hargreaves earned large sums of money as a music-hall artist, and obtained large sums from various, revues staged by Mr. Henshall. In 1920, said counsel, Mrs. Hargreaves' owned several horses, and ran them in her own name and colours. She ran her

horse Capsolette at Eglinton. Before leaving for the course she rang up several bookmakers at : the Victoria Club, among others .Mr. Manny. She told, him she wanted £175 on Capsolette, and Mr. Manny said she was "on." Her horse lost. The other bet was of £200 on her horse Glanhetty, which ran second at Redcar.

Mr. Beyfus added that a further defence was that Mrs, Hargreaves herself was not a principal, but agent for Mr. .William Henshall. This .' she .' strongly denied. ■ '' . ' ' . ; • '

Mrs. Hargreaves, who gave evidence, was cross-examined by Mr. - Thorn Drury, who appeared tar the defendant. He asked: How many times have you been warned off-the . turf ? .. . - .

Plaintiff: I have never been warned off the turf.

Do you know a man named Morris Hill?— Yes. .

Did he obtain a warning-off order against you ?—He did. yes. That was a long time ago, and it has' been withdrawn. I have run horses since. '* : -

Is . that the only order - that has been obtained against you?— thinlc it is. Witness believed Mr. Henshall was at present an undischarged bankrupt. Counsel: Has Henshall been bringing a number of ! such actions as this ?—Yes.

And he does not pay vrhen he 'loses?— I don't know. • ••• ' » , • 1 ; Has Mr. Henshall been warned off the turf ?—He has. '

; Witness said she employed' persons to make bets on her behalf, as "Clifford Taylor." Counsel: Did you employ Mr. Jesse Brown on your behalf ?—Yes, but not as " Clifford Taylor." ' ' . Did you give Mr. Brown a cheque for £1500 which, was . subsequently r dishonoured No, not for £1500.■'