BALL BILL FOR £696.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20472, 25 January 1930, Page 2 (Supplement)

BALL BILL FOR £696.

PEER AND WIFE SUED.

DANCE-FOR A DAUGHTER.

. ; JHE V COMING-OUT " PARTY.

CHAMPAGNE AND " CRASHERS. "

Is it seriously suggested that because a girl is making her entry into society a ball on this scale, costing nearly £7OO, is necessary ? If it is, there may be a serious prospect for many parents." "lhis quostion was askod by the Lord Chief Justice, of England, Lord Hewavt, in a London court, on December 6, in summing up in an action concerning a dispute ovei the cost of tho " coming-out" for the daughter of Lord and Lady Falkland. Gate-crashing, tho trials of Society hostesses, champagne and various other matters were discussed in the course of tho trial. Lord and Lady Falkland wore sued by the May Fair Hotel Company, Ltd.," for £696, the price of a dinner, dance and supper. Lord Falkland s address was given as the Carlton Club, and Lady Falkland's as Brompton Arcade, Brampton Road.

Sir Albion Richardson, for the May

Fair Hotel, said that Lady Falkland had

not delivered a defence to tho action, , and Lord Falkland denied that the ball, supper and dinner were given, and said that if they were given they wero ordered by Lady" 1 Falkland, who had no authority to pledge his credit. Sir Patrick Hastings, K.C., who appeared' with- Sir Albion, said that the question was who should pay for the function, which was arranged by Lady Falkland on the occasion of the " com-ing-out' of her daughter. Lord Falkland, as well as his wife and daughter, was present, but lie now repudiated liability. Luncheon lor Twelve. Sir Patrick asked the jury to find that Lord Falkland was responsible, and that he had acted in such a way that the hotel company would think that he was liable. In January 1928, when Lord and Lady Falkland were living together at their house in Sloane Street, in tho West End, Lady Falkland visited tho May Fair Hotel and said that she wished to arrange a ball fo- her daughter's " coming-out" in tho following June. She engaged tho ballroom suite and adjoining rooms for June f 15.

Counsel added that the hotel management • did not write to Lord Falkland asking whether what his wife was doing was done with his approval. If they had done so the answer would probably have been'curt. The arrangements ere carried out, and on May 19 Lady Falkland had lunch with 12 other people at the hotel to discuss' things. The bill for the meal was signed by Lady Falkland and was one of the items now claimed. The ball, said Sir Patrick, was a great success, and it was noticed that 468 persons, instead of 250 arranged for, attended. " Sometimes society hostesses find that more people attend this kind of functions than are bargained for," commented Sir Patrick. Champagne and Hot Weather.

Mr. Norman Birkett, K.C., who appeared for Lord Falkland, remarked that ■" gate crashers" must have been pres-. enfc.

-Six' Patrick Hastings: We know that they helped to drink the champagne. (Laughter.): It was added by Sir Patrick that Lady _ Falkland did not answer the letter containing the account, and another account was sent. A query was raised about 168 bottles of champagne chai-ged for in the bill, and the hotel management wrote:— That amount between 463 people who had supper in the buffet represents onethird of a bottle per person. That is not la lot for functions of this description, especially-in view of tho hot weather." The bill was again rendered in November, said counsel, and Lady Falkland : replied that it would receive attention -when she returned from the Continent. She expressed satisfaction with the way the arrangements for the ball were carried • ,out. Eventually, as payment had not . been made by Lady Falkland, the bill was sent to her husband. Mr. H. I. P Hallett, at this stage, intervened, remarking that he appeared on behalf ofXady Falkland. Sir Patrick Hastings: I think Mr. Hallett had better say nothing unless " Lady Falkland intends to take part in this trial. r ■ Sir Patrick went on to say that Lord ; - Falkland's solicitors wrote to the plaintiffs stating that Lord Falkland never authorised the sxpenditure for the ball, •but on tho contrary he had expressly • forbidden his wife to incur the expense. It. .was not until he received tho letter containing, ihe bill that lie knew lie was regarded as being liable. Everybody Enjoys the Ball.

, Lord Falkland had admitted in answer to interrogatories, said Sir Patrick, that h$ and some of his friends attended tho ball, ,but he said ho was present at the express wish of Lady Falkland.. " It would .appear," said Sir Patrick, " that Lord Falkland, his friends and his family thoroughly enjoyed the ball and tho refreshments, and yet he now says lie expressly forbade his wife to arrange tho ball."

Mi*. H. G. RerideJl, assistant manager of tho May Fair Hotel, gavo evidence) that lie had never seen Lord Falkland in connection with the arrangements for the ball Credit was first given to Lady Falk.il 0n * n res P cc t ol a sum 4.21 for a lunch. The Lall was partly organised by Mr. Wooley ITart, of Devonshire 1 lace, who, Mr. Rendell understood, was a friend of the family and a wellknown man about town. Mr. Lenclell said lie read in a newspaper that Messrs. Debeuham and Company the drapers, had sued Ladv Falkland for//£244, and had obtained! judgment, but he was not aware at that time that; a bankruptcy notice had been served on Lady Falkland in respect of that matter. - Mr. Rendell said that- the hotel management knew nothing about the financial position of Lord and Lady Falkland or whether Lady Falkland had any private income. He knew that they were rcspeetable , ; people. .A Wealthy American Woman.

r Lord Hewart: Where is the evidence : thai; Lord Falkland knew that tho ball was a " coming-out" ball for his daughter? - Six Patrick replied that Lord Falkland was/at least aware or the fact that Lis wife was giving a ball. Sir Patrick said that Lord Falkland stated, in answer to interrogatories, that ho suggested to his wife the names of ton or twelve people to whom he would like invitations to the ball to be sent. ' Mr. Birkett, addressing the jury, pointed out that all the letters written bv \ the Jiotel company \yitli regard to the bill ~,v "for'the ball were addressed to Lady Falk- ■ / land until the solicitors wrote to Lord j&V - Falkland 'in December 1928. Lord Falknever said a word to the hotel comwould indicate to them that c y might treat his wife as. his agent.

He forbade his wife to incur the cost of the ball, but he received an assurance from his wife that MfS. Orme, a .wealthy American, was paying everything. "It is madness to talk of this expenditure of £696 on a ball as a necossary," added Mr. Birkett. - tord,. Falkland, giving_ evidence, said that he now lived at Prince's Chambers, Coventry Street, but- in 1928 he was living with his wife at Sloane Street. . They were on speaking terms, ho said, but not on good terms. It was only a fortnight liefore Juno 15, the date of the bull, that his "wife mentioned "that, she' was giving a ball for the-coming-out" of their daughter. I said it was quite impossible,: as we could not afford it," said Lord Falkland. "My wife replied that Mrs. Orme would pay every penny of the cost of .the ball, and it was at my wife's invitation that I attended. At her request I suggested tho names of people who otight to be invited."

Lord Falkland said that there were liabilities which both his wife and himself had to meet last year. Sir * Patrick Hastings: Wero you on good terms with your daughter ?—Perfectly. 1 '

- And seeing her everyday?— Yes. Did she never refer to the fact that she was having a "coming-out" ball?— I may havo' forgotten the date on which it was first • mentioned to mo. I do not suggest that anything was being concealed from me. Lord Falkland said that he did not expect to receive a "-bill from the hotel company, as ho thought Mrs. Orme was going to pay. He agreed that ho never took steps to ascertain whether the hotel

company had been' informed that Mrs. Orme was giving the ball. Sir Patrick Hastings r When Lady Falkland incurs debts with tradesmen ana does not pay, you receive the bills ? Mr. Birkett: Do .you distinguish between tradesmen's bills and an account for _ nearly £7OO for a ball?— Yes, I do.i

Sir Patrick Hastings intimated that, as there was' a .lack. of. evidence, that Lord Falkland know.about the dinner in May, when Lady Falkland "and some friends had a meal at the hotel, the claim for £2l for the dinner would be abandoned. Lord Hewart, summing-up, said "that as women had asserted the independence of their position legislation had recognised more and more their separate individuality and responsibility. Since the passing of the Married Women's Property Act, 1893, the law was that every' contract entered into by a married woman, otherwise than as agent, should be deemed to be a contract entered into by her with respect to her. separate property. Necessaries were defined by Lord Hewa/t as " things that may fairly be considered essential to the decent maintenance and goneral comfort- of a person in accordance with Iris social position." He added that at no time did the hotel company communicate with Lord Falkland about the arrangements for the ball, and they did not even ask him what wines should be served.

"Is it not conceivable," asked Lord Hewart, " that tho truth of tho mattei is that the hotel company never gave a thought to the question of any lia bility going beyond Lady Falkland her self until, six months after the ball line been held, they found to their surprise that she was not going to pay?"

The jury consulted for forty-five minute!! and the questions put to them were •• answered as follows:

(1) Woro the goods and services ueceii sarie3?—lsot agreed.

(2) Before the goods were supplied cr the services rendered liud Lord Falkland, forbidden his wife to pledgo his credit 5 —Yes.

I-. , ' a3 110 credit in fact given to Lady kalkland alone?—Xo (1) Did Lord Falkland hold oufc his wifn, °F . a 'l c L w l )el ! bold herself out, to tfcd plaintiffs as lna ostensible agent?— Yes. (5) Did the plaintiff, in making the contract. reasonably act in bona lido reliance en the authority of Lady Falkland to plcdjlu her husband's credit?— Yes.

Sir Patrick Hastings asked for judip ment for plaintffs. Mr. Monckton, for Lord Falkland, submitted that there was no cvidenco on svhich the jury could come to the conclusions at which they had arrived. Lord Hewart said that he would reserve judgment, and on another day hoar argument with regard to the jury's answers.

Miss,Jarmann accepts the position philosophically. "No one will ever bo able to get the rule altered, so what is the use of worrying," she said. Her mother, who is also an actress, was indignant about the resignation of hqr future son-in-law. "Itis a shaaio that ho has to leave the she said. " "He is a' great - fencer, horseman, and . Rugby player, and naw lie will. not. bo. able to gain a place in the arrry fencing team, which was his great ambition." . . Mr. Francis was the central figuro in the fierce legal battle which was waged in America over the £11,000,000 fortune of his. grandmother, who bequeathed her money to Mr. Francis, his sister Evelyn, and three cousins in tha United States. His sharing in the estai;e was contested on the ground that he was a British subject. Mr. Francis ,is now twenty-three, a tall young man with black hair and a small black moustache. ■ .His fiancee is blonde, petite, and aged nineteen. She has been on the stage since she was three. " They fell so much in Jove at'first sight that they have hardly been out of each other's sight," said Mrs. Jarmann, " but it was only a fortnight ago that they became engaged. The announcement was postponed until Mr. Franeiis could see his colonel and prepare him for his resignation.

" The marriage is t? take place soon—immediately my daughtei; has fulfilled her theatrical engagements. Mr. Francis' sister has one of the largest estates at

Basingstoke,' in the county, and we are thinking of a wonderful country ceremony, with lots of farm handis and all that sort of thinpr." Mr. Francis said his only plans for the future woro a trip round the world as a honeymoon, and then to settle down in London. He has a miignificent house in Mayfair, which is no\7 let to a maliarajah, as wejl as ft country seat. One of his hobbies is aviation. He has taken his fianceo up in his own aeroplane a number of times.

Major Francis Francis, father of tho coming bridegroom, w]jo died last year, was a famous soldier ol! fortune, who met many adventures during bis campaigns. lio was also a noted sportsman. Ho married tho daughter of an American millionaire. It was his Ijxed determination that his son should bo a cavalry officer. A similar case, which creatod a great stir in December, 1928, of a Guards ollicer giving up his army career to marry an actress, was that of Captain Archie Grant and Miss Teddio Gerard.