CHAPTER LXV.

Otago Witness, Issue 1866, 26 August 1887, Page 10

CHAPTER LXV.

THE SUBPffiNA AND THE HUNT PARTY.

Nothing is more remarkable in the whole of these proceedings than the calm manner in vehich the Langworthys mereet fite assume that the business of the Court- should be subordinated to their convenience. Mr Langworthy carries out this to the extreme of ignoring the authority of the Courts altogether, setting their decrees at defiance and treating them with contempt. This he is able to do by keeping himself outside the jurisdiction of the Court, His mother is not able to do this because she is resident and has real property in the country. But she seems to regard it as a monstrous hardship that she should ever be summoned to attend the law Courts. The public ia already familiar with the repeated affdavits by which she endeavored to avoid appearing before Baron Huddleston.

The same characteristic appeared in the bankruptcy proceedings. Leave was given to privately examine her. The case was set down for hearing on the 13th of April. On the 9th — which was Easter Eve— she was served with a subpoena, demanding her attendance at the Registrar's Chambers, Bankruptcy Buildings, to give evidence in the matter.

On the appointed morning Mrs Langworthy, jun., with her counsel and solicitor, was in attendance, but Mrs Langworthy, sen.,' did not put in an appearance. In her place stood Mr Thomas*Wilsbn Danby. Why was not Mrs Langworthy there ?

Mr Danby rose to explain. Mrs Langworthy, sen., was giving a hunt party, and it was most inconvenient for her to be

present : so she stopped away. "Of course, she was perfectly willing te come forward," said Mr Danby. Whereupon Mr Registrar Hazlitt remarked drily : " That is always said when a witness does not attend." " But," said Mr Danby, «« it is Easter week, and most inconvenient for an old lady of seventy to come to Court in holiday time." Then Mr Hazlitt (who is well advanced in years himself) remarked blandly that, however that might be, he knew he had to attend the Court. As Mrs Langworthy was not there, he would postpone the examination to a more convenient season ; but she must pay the costs of that day. Did ever a Court accept in a more kindly fashion the plea of inconvenience to the rich as an excuse for non-attendance ? But even this was not enough for Mr Danby. He protested against his client being saddled with the costs incurred, by, her own neglect to attend. His idea seemed to be that the other side should with counsel and all the rest be allowed to dance attendance, while his client remained at home enjoying her hunt party without paying a penny of the costs. , This view of the situation was too much for Mr Registrar Hazlitt He said : "I do not think so. I think it is just that it should be so. The expenses have been incurred, and gentlemen are Here in various capacities to attend the appointments And now,, because somebody told her that, she' was not 'likely to be required' until the I3th, and she has consequently got a party, therefore the sitting must be

postponed : Under these circumstances sh must pay all costs." c The examination was therefore postponed for several days, and Mrs Langworthv jun., left the Court wondering what would have happened if she had neglected to obey a subpoena on the ground that she was en joying herself elsewhere. But then o j course, there is alUthe difference in* the wprld between a poor plaintiff who is de pending upon charity for daily bread and the other party who is rich enough to give hunt parties.