Notes for Women

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19254, 19 August 1924, Page 5

Notes for Women

m;lklj

Items of social interest and topics relating to the homo are invited. Communications must be accompanied by the name and address of the writer. Xoticea of engagements must bo jignod by one at least of the principals, or by some responsible person, as a guarantee of genuineness-

PERSONAL AND SOCIAL. Miss Irvine is at x>resent visiting Oamaru.

• • • Mrs C. G. Curtis, of Timaru, is paying a short visit to Mrs Wilson.

Mrs Wheatland returned to town last ■week after spending a week with Mrs Tom M'Kinlny, at. Tnapeka Mouth, where she has left her daughter Doris for a few weeks.

Mrs C. Kattray, of Musselburgh Rise had a small dinner party in honour of Sir Dimto and Lady Ferguson on Friday evening last, Mr and Mrs J. Cook and Mr and Mrs Fcuwiek being present.

Miss I!. Sproston, who will assist at a pianoforte recital to bo given by Mr Frank Bennett shortly, is a young soprano who is rapidly making a name for herself in musical circles. Her singing .should be an enjoyable feature in the programme.

During the week-end Mr and Mrs Charles rinekott and Mr and Sirs Gravestoek were entertained by Mr and Mrs Barling at their beautiful borne “Glcnfalloch” at Macandrew’s Bay.

Miss Rattray, of Dglinton, entertained Lady Ferguson at a small bridge afternoon on Friday hist, the other guests being Mesdames Cook, Cheeseman, M'Master, Rattray, and Fitchott, Misses Deniston aud Sisc.

The weekly cabaret licit! at the Tudor Hall was particularly successful on Saturday evening, all present seeming to be in the best of spirits. Tile members of the Charles Hackett Company were there, and also a party brought by Mr and Mrs Hamer.

Mrs M. A. Ross, of Frederick street, whose youngest son (Mr Frank Ross) has just come of age, gave a very enjoyable evening at her home on Saturday night last to numerous friends and members of the family. A delightful repast was prepared for the guests, and cards, games, and dancing wore indulged in until a late hour. Mrs Ross proved to be a charming hostess, and the success of the evening depended in no small measure on her untiring efforts and hospitality.

The students resident at Knox College lie Id a dance in idle College Hall on F riday evening last. The decorations were blue ami gold, while in the supper room the tables looked beautiful with vases of japonica, camellias, and wattle. borne of those present were Professor and Mrs Hewitsou, Dr and Mrs Riley, Dr and Mrs Dickie, Dr and Mrs Ratcliff, Dr and Mrs Jack, Mr ami Mrs Gilray, Mr and Mrs T. Ross, Miss Fairbairn, Misses Mollison (-), Miss Rule, Miss L. Ross, Miss E. lairbairn, Miss M'Gill, and X’rofcssor ’Adams.

A very jolly dance was held in the halt of the Otago Girls’ High School on Friday evening hist in honour of the visiting Ashburton hockey and basketball teams. Ihe hall was decorated in the Ashburton colours, yellow ami black, and the balloons and streamers w'bich many of the girl 3 carried added additional notes of bright colour. Those present included Miss King, principal of the Otago Girls’ High School, Miss Morison (the teacher in charge of the Ashburton teams), the members of the High School staff, various exHigh School girls, and the members of tao teams with their emergencies. The music played by Miss Maysel Taylor, invited everybody* to' dance, and the evening ended all too soon at half-past 10.

» * » A very enjoyable evening was lately held in the Oddfellows’ Hall at Outram, when over SO couples attended the Croquet (dub ball. The hall was prettily decorated with coloured streamers, supper being served in the Drill Hall. Mr and Mrs A talker led the grand march, and Mr 1. W right and Mr hi Snow carried out their duties as M.UVs creditably. Music was rendered W the Outram Orchestra. Some of the ladies present wore Mrs A- Walker (president), henna beaded crope-de-chmo; Mrs id. W. Brookes (secretary), black and gold satin • Mrs 11. Stevens, black satin and pearls; Mrs Scott, black and Oriental silk; \lra Cameron, while satin; Miss L. Bathgate, blue velvet; Miss L. Doherty, gold morocain; Miss Glcndinning, lavender ninon; Miss A. Southgate, green satin; Miss A. Stanaway, blue taffeta; Miss Little, blue morocain; Mrs L. Hughes, black silk moirotte; Miss I. Reid, apricot taffeta; Miss B. Harrison, apricot satin; Miss Bunting, blue morocain; and Miss Ford, red shot taffeta.

Women played no unimportant part in the success attending the Albany Street, School jubiloe celebrations just concluded. In both the planning and the carrying out of the functions they rendered excellent service arid their counsel and' labour? Mere valuable factors in the smooth running of the various events. In the church parade they outnumbered the men. At the reunion in the Early Settlers’ Hall their representatives—Mrs Jolly (first mistress), Miss Haig, and Miss M’Millan- had seats of honour on the stage. Mrs Jolly having the distinction of handing over to the school the handsome dux honours board. They figured on the toast list at the dinner-. The palm for unquenchable speech is usually awarded to women. At this dinner, however, the male speakers effectively exploded this fallacy—so effectively, indeed that the sole speaker of the other sox Miss Alice Andrew was left something like a minute and a-h’alf in which to give her message. For its brevity and conciseness her speech might have served as a valuable model it delivered earlier in the evening. In Miss Sullivan the women gave to the executive ii born business woman who did a host ot. invaluable work. Further, the programmes at all functions were enriched by the contributions of talented young ladies, amongst them Miss Phyllis West, Miss Alice Mdkinson Miss Clare Mathcson, Miss Madge Yates, Mrs M’Donald, Miss Lorna Smith, and four young dancers—Misses Fox (i), Beck and” .Sinclair.

On Saturday evening the Arts Faculty of ihe Otago University held Us annual dinner in the-Strand Salon. Hie University colours, bine and gold were seen m streamers and hydrogcn-hlled balloons, while vellow narcissi looked charming on the. tables. The occasion was a very successful one and was largely attended. Among those present, were Dr and Mrs rhornpson, Dr and Mrs Elder. Dr and Mrs Lawson, Dr and Airs Holloway, Mr Hall (president of the 0.U.5.A.) ami. Mrs Hall, Mrs Galloway Professors Ramsay, Bonham, Adams, and Dunlop; Misses Eileen Ballantyne (vicepresident of the 0.U.5.A.) Barron, h e, ■Clement, and Turnbull. Members of the other faculties wore represented by Miss Blaikio (homo science). Mr Butler (medical) Mr Irwin (dental), Mr Henderson (commerce!. Mr Bnrrowdougb (law), and Mr R. Penseler (mining and science).

GOLDEN WEDDING. Old and respected residents of Green Glam! in tho persons of Mr and Mrs Thomas Campbell. of Victoria place, celebrated their golden wedding on Ihursday afternoon last. On account of the recent ..nrious illness of Mrs Campbell, the gather'd,,. was limited to the immediate members of "the family, and tho Rev. Jno. and Mrs Kilnatrick. ''Hie Rev. David Campbell, of West Taicri (tho eldest son), presided and read congrnt alat.ory letters and telegrams from Invercargill, Outran), Dunedin, Christchurch, Wellington, Auckland, and Australia, and also from local friends. r I ho toast of (he bride, and bridegroom was proposed hv the Rev. Jno. Kilpatrick, who paid a, high tribute to the work and worth of Rio favoured couple, and of the esteem in which thev were held bv all. The bridesmaid of TO years, ago (a sister of the bride) in the person of Mrs Jo.s. Slra-ck, of Otolvia, was present, am! her health was duly honoured. .Mr hi rack responding on her behalf. AI went friends were not forgotten, and a special tribute of pnil.se was accorded to Miss Jessie Campbell, whose faithfulness, loyally, and devotion to her aged parents was duly emphasised by Mr Jns. Strack, who proposed the toast. Mr and Mrs Campbell. who were married in Dunfermline, Fi feature. .Scotland, on August 14. 1874. have resided in Green Island for over 40 years. Of a. fa.milv of 11 children, throe sons and six daughters are living, a.nd two sons and five daughters were present at the function. There are 21 grandchildren, some of whom contributed by vocal item:- to (he harmony nf the gathering. The bridesmaid of 50 years ago was tho recipient of a handsome

floating flower bowl as a commemorative rift from tho bridegroom; the old couple received many useful and handsome guts, five of tho grandchildren contributing their gifts in gold. The function commenced about 12.50 p.m. and terminated at about 4 o’clock. Iho singing of the Doxology formed a fitting' climax to the proceedings of (ho afternoon.

Tt i>' essential that every individual member send a reply to there questions. Tf no reply is received, the answer will bo taken in the affirmative in troth eases.

WOMEN AT LAW. THE PIONEER CLUBB CASE. As a great many women are interested in the action which came before the Supremo Court last week, affecting the Pioneer Club in Wellington, the following report of the proceedings is abridged from tho New Zealand Times:— Charlotte Ann Henderson, of Waipapa read, Hataitai, proceeded against Amy G. Kane, Julia Myers, E. Butler, E. A. Brewer, S. Gifford, Lucy Newton, A. Mackenzie. P. Reeve;, Thyra Taylor, and tho Pioneer Club Incorporated, a society duly incorporated under the Incorporated Societies Act, 1933, r.nd having its offices on Lambton quay The plaintiff, in her statement of claim, set forth that :he had been a member of tho Pioneer Club, and that the defendants were tho commit tec of the club. In May, 1924, a proposal had come before the chib tor tho purchase of certain premises on Wellington Terraco, as a club house. On May 9 a meeting was hold for the purpose of discussing the proposal. On May 10, the committee forwarded to tho club members, including the plaintiff, a voting paper which read: — Important: I’kmecr Club. Dear Mariam— Yon have received a not! or ol the proposal to buy the property, Ko. 102 the Terrace, lor a clubhouse. The matlter has been discussed at a general meeting of members. As it is absolutely necessary for pismire ns to come to a definite decision, you arc requested to send a reply to the following:— Are you in favour of the purchase of tho property? Y<v. No. (Cross out which you do pot vote for.) Can you take any delrentures to assist in raising the money? State’ how many. £2OOO or more must be raised in £fr debentures which will carry G per cent, interest, and bo paid off at the rate of 10 to 20 yearly.

Rule 33 of tho club provided that, in tho event of certain action being taken, it should he by ballot, and tho proposal came within tho scope of the rule. Tho plaintiff and certain other members of the club had serious doubts as to whether it was proper for the committee of tho club in a matter involving great financial responsibility, for the club to act upon the words “if no reply is received, the answer will be taken in the affirmative in both cases.” Accordingly, she and Miss Mary Skerrott, another member of the club, consulted a solicitor on the point. On May 6 ho wrote to tho plaintiff stating, “that it was abundantly clear that the voting paper entirely disregards the specific rule on the subject, and, in my opinion, whatever is the result of tho circular, it is not valid, and amounts only to a collection of individual opinions of members.” On May 19 sixteen members of the club, including the plaintiff, wrote to tho pro-' sident, pointing out that they had not been given information as to the financial soundness of the scheme, nor on such practical considerations as future selling value, drainage, cost of repairs, etc., and expressing tho opinion tnat the time had not come for the assumption of heave financial responsibility. Also, they viewed the Terraco site with disfavour, owing to its inaccessibility. Tlie signatures (appended were those of M. Rogers, C. E. Kirk, M. Atkinson, for M. Skerrott per C. A. PL, for M. Campbell per C. A- Henderson, F. Piper, M. Campbell, Agnes Boyd, A. F. Cowx. S. Carter, C. A. Henderson, E. M. Raddiffe, M. H. Chnttield, Laura Bunting, G. E. Cray, E. Ilelyer. Tho legal opinion was appended. May 31 saw the committee send to members of the club, including the plaintiff, a circular stating that 183 members had voted in tho affirmative, and 190 in the negative. The committee was resolved, in view of the substantial opposition to the proposal, to abandon the proposal. This had been followed, on Juno 5, by an undated letter from the committee of the club in which it was stated: My committee regards your conduct in this issue as a very grave breach of etiquette. Jt considers that such conduct, strikes at the very foundations of club life. It. views with alarm the presence in the club, for the management of whose affairs it is responsible, so disloyal ao element.

My committee trusts that upon oomsMerafion of its views of the matter a? here set out, you will see your way to make an adequate apology for your most discourteous conduct, or that you will perhaps deem it a wiser course to tender your resignation from the club, in the responsible officials of which you have, apparently no further confidence. . . . Should you desire to be hoard personally by my committee, I am directed to inform you that this can be arranged. The letter also stated that a copy of the undated memorandum sent by Mrs Henderson also had been received. June 9 saw Mrs Henderson write to the committee asking for a copy of the memorandum which she was alleged to have written, and to bo informed which of the rules of the club she had violated.

Two days later she received a reply enclosing the copy asked and stating that the position, as set out in tho previous letter, seemed sufficiently clear. Plaintiff was told, further, ihat tho committee would meet on Tuesday, June 17, and would bo ready to hear her personally unless she preferred to make an apology in writing before that date.

Correspondence continued. A denial by Mrs Henderson (hat she had written the memorandum followed, and on Juno 17 Mrs J. D. Gray ha,d headed a deputation to tile committee. In consequence of this the luh secretary wrote to Mrs Gray stating that it was understood that the deputation had been acting on Mrs Henderson’s behalf, and requesting that she bo informed (bat the committee would meet again on the 20th, and that she then would be granted a final opportunity of making & personal explanation.

The matter had then not teen placed in the hands of a firm of solicitors, but Mr Blair wrote on his own account to the committee slating that “it apparently was assuming that it enioyod further powers and authority which it clearly did not possess,’’ and advising it to cease calling on Mr.- Henderson for an apology. After the receipt of tills letter the committee wrote to the plaintiff for the last time, and stated that it “had come to the conclusion that you wish to adopt the other alternative mentioned ... to tender your resignation from the Pioneer Club.” It added that “at a general meeting of elub members which has been railed for Wednesday. Juno 25, you will be granted every opportunity cf stating your case.” Accompanying this letter was a com - of a circular sent to club members in which it had been stated;—

Cm* mftmlipr, in spitn of tho fact that the president distinctly asked that, the proposal (for the purchase of the property) he not discussed, outside the club, obtained an opinion on the legality of the notice from a lawyer quite unconnected with the (dnb, and sent a copy of this unsigned and without, cxpbntaion to the president of the club. This was laid before the committee, who considered the matter *uich a prav<‘ breach of club etiquette that they wrote in the member fMvs -I. Henderson) asking for cxplunation or apo)(»gy. In spite of the fact, that oprortnnltf has been given on three separate occasions for Mrs Henderson to meet the committee. &he has not done so, but has, instead, starred up strife and discord among the club members 1 , and has behaved in an insulting and abusive manner toward* the acting secretary. Mrs Henderson Jus. also, through the acting Feorelary, made serious and fcilsv accusations against, tbo committee itself.

We feel Hint tlie presence of sneli ;i metr,cots positively harmful t« the well-being of the elnh, amt have therefore taken the extreme but fpiite neeessniy step of removing tier name from t,h" membership list In or.ler that she may state her ease to club members, u, genera] meeting will be heirl nn Wedne-srlay, .Inly 25. at 8 p.m., which yon arc earnestly ' rennet,te-1 to attend. Von will !»■ asked in stale whether yon desire Mrs ifendersnn or your committee to manage the affairs of the ('lnti. Them eannni, be dm:) control. While regretting the ueyessity of bringing sneli sordid details before your notice, # vour committee feel thill they have exorcised exemplary patience under very living eireiimsUinces, and matters have gone to tar that there can bo no further compromise.

Mr Blair took the next step. On July 4 hn wrote to the committee to ash whether or not Mr» Henderson's name had been removed from the membership list, and ask ing whether the committee would take the necessary steps “to correct the wrong done to Mi’s Henderson.” Otherwise the service of writs on every member of the committee was threatened.

Through another firm of solicitors the

committee replied to the effect that they were prepared to accept service of proceedings. The plaintiff claimed that the action of the committee in purporting to expel the plaintiff was contrary to natural justice and unlawful!; and, further, tliat in consequence she had sustained damage, been deprived of her rights as a club member, and injured in her reputation. ohe asked a declaration that she was still a member of the club, and entitled to share its privileges; that a mandatory injunction should ho issued against the defendants requiring them to expunge all resolutions purporting to expel the plaintiff from the club, and restore her to full enjoyment of all the privileges of membership. Thirdly, she claimed an injunction restraining the defendants from taking any strips to exclude her from the club, and, finally, the sum of £250 damages. Charlotte Ann Henderson, plaintiff in the action, said that the club had received the legal opinion on May If). On May 20 she had met the president, and had a conversation with her. Mr Blair: What was that? His Honor (alarmed) : Oh no, wo don’t want the full conversation. —(Laughter.) Witness said that she had asked the president why she had taken such actum. The president had spoken in a very excited, disjointed way, saying: “That Pioneer Club opinion. I did it to hurt you.”

A day or so after having received tho second letter she met the president on Lamhton quay near the Kelt)' n car. Asked why the proceedings had gone on, the president then had said that witness had neither the money nor the health to fight the action.

To Mr Myers: They had been very good friends up to May 20. Until then they had been very good friends indeed, but on that date witness had been very shocked. At the meeting later she had not mentioned anything of Miss Kane’s remarks while at the meeting. Mr Myers: Frankly, the reason why I’m asking you is that Miss Kane gives all that you’ve said a point blank denial. Witness said that she had consulted her solicitors first on May lt>.

Mr Myers: Do you know Miss Ford? — Yes.

Did you make this statement to her?—“l made Miss Kane and I’m going to wreck her and break the Pioneer Club ?”—No, X did uot.

Do you know Mrs Leicester? —Tes. Diif you make a similar statement to her?—No.

Do you know Miss Daisy Isaacs? You know where she is employed? She is employed at a certain secondary school in Wellington. Did you go to her Here Mr Blair interrupted, and at tho word of his Honor Mr Myers abandoned this line of questioning. Mr Myers continued his cross-examina-tion, and witness stated that she had not recognised the seriousness of what Miss Kane had said until later. Naturally, she had been very distressed.

Amy Grace Kane followed plaintiff into the box. She was president of the Pioneer Club, and, having heard Mrs Henderson's evidence, she denied the statement which plaintiff imputed to her, nor, until that day, had she ever heard any suggestion that she had said such a thing. Following the meeting of the other society, plaintiff had asked her whether she objected to plaintiff obtaining legal opinion. Witness had said that she thought it “a rotten thing to do.” The statement alleged to have been made on Lambton quay also was denied. Witness did not even remember meeting Mrs Henderson on the date given. But she had never at any time said such a thing.

Mr Blair: Would you go the length of saking that Mrs Henderson’s evidence was pure fabrication? Witness: X had no such conversation with Mrs Henderson. Mr Blair; The first shot was fired when Mrs Henderson received an undated letter which reached her on June 5. Had you any instructions from the committee to call for a resignation or an apology?—The letter was submitted to and approved,by the committee before it was sent out. Mr Blair: Did not the resolution say that “a drastic letter was to be written to Mrs Henderson? I contend that it was an attempt by Miss Kane and Miss Taylor to turn Mrs Henderson out of the chib. Had you any authority to call on Mrs Henderson to resign? You did that on your own account? —No; in a letter which the committee approved.

Now, who was the draughtsman of the famous circular? Y'ou and Miss Taylor again?—The committee. So you were ail in it! Was there a full meeting ?—Xcs. Mr Biair asked for any passage in the letter which contained a request for an apology, and witness road a passage in the letter which contained a request for an apology, and witness read a passage. Can you show me in the letter any indication that her name had been removed from the club list? Ytou told 500 members of the dub that you hud taken the extreme, but necessary, step of removing her name from the membership of the club. And then you asked her to resign!

Witness read a passage which said: “We cannot possibly allow you to continue your membership of the club.” “While regretting the necessity of bringing in such sordid details.” Whose word is “sordid?” I do not. know. “The committee considers that it has exercised extreme patience.” Do you seriously suggest that the committee exercised any patiesce at all?—Yes. “Under very trying circumstances.” Was it trying to you to be told that you had made a. mess of your voting-paper?—We do not know it. When Mrs Gray came to the committee, said witness, she had put to them tho fact that possibly no discourtesy had been intended. How many members of tho club have you—about 540? Yes. And tills was sent out to the whole 540? —Yes. Wasn’t that sent out to take an unfair advantage?—No. What was it sent out for?—For the purpose of explaining the committee’s action. When the meeting was held tho first suggestion was that some independent person should take the chair. Mr hi vers: It was against the rules.

Mr Blair: They could have got over it by permission of the meeting. At that meeting you put the position as that either you went out or Mrs Henderson?—Yes. You know that Mrs Henderson was a humble member of the club?—-No. Then why did you not tackle Miss Skerrett of Mrs Grey?—Because Mrs Henderson was the only one we knew had obtained legal opinion. You knew that Miss Skerrett had obtained a legal opinion? It wasn't sent to us. . Did you make any attempt to obtain any explanation from anyone else?—No. Did you know what was her reason ? We have received no reason from Mrs Henderson. But isn’t the document self-explanatory ? There are differences of opinion even in the legal profession. Well, wasn’t she entitled to obtain an opinion as a member of the club?—l do not know. What did you want to get her there for? Did you not say at a tea party in Kolburn the other day?—Mr Blair, I have not been to a tea party in Kelburn for many months. To His Honor: The letter had been the beginning of all the trouble. The committee had thought the manner in which the opinion had been sent to it discourteous. The covering letter had been unsigned; and, further, they thought that she had been wrong in obtaining the opinion behind the back of the committee. They thought that she should have come to the committee and asked them to take legal advice. Had she acted so thev would have done it. That was the sole ground for complaint? —Yes. Do you know the grounds on which you are entitled to expel a member?—Either for a breach of the rules or grave misconduct. Do yon regard that as grave misconduct? —Not” that. no.

Then you didn’t regard it as a ground for expulsion. It must, have boon something which happened afterwards. Was it. that? —lt was contained in the letter which our secretary wrote. Mr Blair interjected: A so-called explanation bv (he, committee had left a shir on the plaintiff. His Honor took tip the letter. “Yon (old mo that if was _ something which happened afterwards which caused yon to expel Mrs Henderson," he said. “Tito first letter which vour secretary wrote contained the words: ‘Or perhaps you will deem it a wiser course to send in your resicnation from the chib.’ ’’ What charges worn made against Mrs Henderson at (his meeting of the committee? —Our secretary reported her conduct during the time that she had been acting. So that at the meeting of June 25 slio

was charged with other things besides discour tes y?—Y es.

Y'ou know that Mrs Henderson was not. the only one concerned —She was the only ono concerned whose conduct wo complained of. When did you find out in any way that there were other persons concerned?—When the deputation came. His Honor referred to tho general meeting.

Mr Blair: There is a shorthand report of the meeting taken by my clerk which can he nut into court.. To Mr Myers: No, he did not go there for that purpose. Ho wont there as a bodyguard to protect Mrs Henderson from personal violence. — (Laughter,) Mr Blair, in his address to the court, submitted that expulsion from the club would carry with it social extinction. The society was an incorporated one under the Act of 1908; a similar entity to a company, and ho contended that there was a contract between the parties whereby the members agreed to bind themselvs to abide by tho rules of the club, and tho club to allow members the enjoyment of its privileges. They would not ask, even if they were entitled to, for damages against the club. They did not desire to hold it responsible for the wilful acts of individuals. Mr Myers; It was tho committee which pronounced tho expulsion at a general meeting. _ . Mr Blair: My friend is not quite right. I had to write and ask the club if Mrs Henderson’s name had been removed from the roll of members. This, they claimed, was a breach of tort. Tho whole of the acts had been unlawful with no claim or justification. “I will say this much,” stated Mr Blair, “they have made use of the club. I will say also that they coerocd tho club. They brought over tho wobblers by making it perfectly clear that it was a case for either the committee or Mrs Henderson. There could not be two. This was for the purFose of imposing their will on the question, say that those people have, in effect, got their heads together for tho purpose of getting Mrs Henderson out of tho club and inflicting on her social annihilation. Miss Kano has denied Mrs Henderson’s statements. My learned friend seems to think that remarkable.’

His Honor: When two ladies indulge in an animated discussion with mutual recrimination I am not surprised that the one witness’s version differs from the other.

Mr Blair went on to say that the idea of obtaining’ the premises on Wellington tcrraoo had been knocked on the head. Ho believed that the committee had determined to revenge themselves on Mrs Henderson. He read extracts from the circular sent to club members on the expulsion of Mrs Henderson, “There cannot bo dual control,” he quoted as seeming that control had been taken out of the hands of the president and the other ladies. Mrs Henderson was tho leader of the opposition and embodied it, and they had thought that she must be punished for having tho teremity to oppose the will of tho committee. Later they had treated her conduct as discourteous because she would not attend meetings at the dictation of the committee. The manner in which she had been put out showed that there was some motive not for the benefit of the club. He quoted references on tho case submitting (hat there was a ground for action, and that the difficulty of assessing damages did not preclude a claim.

Mr H. H. Cornish also addressed the court on the point of law. Mr Myers, in his address, was brief. Counsel for the plaintiff, he said, might have adduced certain facts in tho statement of claim as a second oauso of action. Ho contended that it would not hare been so. He quoted authority for the contention that the position was not certain. _ The action miglit have to be brought against the club or there might be no ground for action for damages. Mr P. Levi pointed out that all the communications sent to plaintiff had been official. The defendants could hardly be hold responsible for tho bona fide act of the club.

Hi’s Honor then gave judgment on two of the points concerned. The plaintiff claimed in the first place that she was still a member of the club, secondly asked for an injunction against interference with her rights as a member, and thirdly claimed damages both against the club and committee. The question of damages was involved in considerable legal difficulty, and he proposed to defer consideration on the point. As to the expulsion, it had been admitted by the defendants that the action was wrong, both in form and substance. The proper procedure was not adopted, and the proper legal grounds not in existence. Tinder the rules of the club a member could be expelled on two grounds, and on two grounds only, a breach of the rules or grave misconduct. It was not suggested that any breach of the rules was committed by Mrs Henderson. It was suggested that she was guilty of grave misconduct; but he saw nothing in the facts disclosed to suggest that this was so. The committee had been engaged in what he could only characterise ns an illegal enterprise in regard to the proposed purchase of the property. Its action had been wholly illegal and improper. Mrs Henderson had taken legal advice, and it had been contended by the committee that in doing so she had been guilty of discourtesy to them and disloyalty to the club. As he had said he did not consider her conduct to be of this description. Having obtained it, she was not only entitled—indeed, it was her duty—to inform the committee. He was at a loss to understand how the committee could have viewed the matter as they did. It was suggested that an apology since made by tho committc was insincejc. He did not think that the apology had been meant in that sense. But, things being so, he had in the first place to give the plaintiff declaration which she asked for, namely, that the proceedings of the committee had been illegal and invalid, and that she remained a member of tho club. He took it that Mrs Henderson would not be interfered with in any way, and that she would remain a member. That being so, to issue the injunction asked would be improper at the present time and he would leave it until it might be necessary. On the question of damages there was some difficulty of law as to whether the action should be brought against the club itself, the committee or both, and he would reserve the matter for further consideration. Plaintiff would be entitled to costs on the lowest scale.