A GIRL AND HER SHOES

Otago Witness, Issue 2623, 22 June 1904, Page 61

A GIRL AND HER SHOES

PRICE £250 PER PAIR

CURIOUS CASE. (From Our Own Coeresfoxdent.) LONDON, May I*. A peculiar oaso lias Just been c 7 ealt with at the Law Courts, with the result that a certain pair of girl's sho^s turned out to cost practically £250. This seemed expensive But " thereby hangs a tale." Some years ago I had occasion to describe a great law caso in which se/eral judges, juries, and crowds of Queen's counsel and other Leaeling barristers were earployed, in which several promine it journals, including The Times itself, were brought up for contempt of court, and in which other sensational things happened, the cause of tho whole .turmoil being simply a girl's little. sLoe. The question tried \v*s whether a pretty yoang girl, a olerk by profession and a menober of a Libei&l Club, had -oermiited

a number of admiring lnasciliue membcis to drink her health out of her shoe — for wli cli j alleged permission sh© na= expelled fiom the club,— or whether th«y had performed this homage without her sanction. On that occasion tho Daily Telegraph remaik&d m a leading article that " Miss Duncan's slipper mu=t be atlded to the long list of articles of apparel which ha\e become famous in history, including Joseph's coat, Elijah's njanitle, Raleigh's cloak, and Mr GlacU stone's collars,." But a m al in historic fam-o to Mi-s Duncan's slipper l>as just arisen, in the phapQ of a pair of shoes sunphc-d to an attractive young setr^ss, which s-hces L*ve cost a theatrical company no k&s than £125 nominally an 1 fully £250 in reality ! The plaintiff, Miss Teresa Anderson, a rretty and smarily-drossed girl, said she was a chorus singer in a musical olay called '"The Medal and the Maid." .She had to onacfc the part cf a schoolgirl, and was to be provided by the company with '" equipment necessary for her pair." Tins equipment included dresses, and according to the official "particulars," also a pair of '" patent leather court sl-oes with extra-high heels." She was measured for the shoe?, which were specially made for her. When they arrived, however, Miss Anderson found tii-ey were " much too largo" for her. She complained, but was told sho mi^t " mak" them do," and that she "v. oulel not gee any others." Accordingly she- did hpr be=', and. her dresser put some elastic aero - the mi ?tcps. She wore them for 10 any-, but one day, when she was walking from he- dress-ing-room to the stage, she tripped ana fell — her foot "slipping from under hci" — ov ing 1 , as the declared, to the shoe* being c o much too large, and she fell heavily, severely injuring her knee. For this injury mig c'ar.nrj damages. Ths defendants denied thai, tl'.-e were too large or that Miss Andrison made any complaint. They nlendecl that it -he wore the shoes knowing them to ba ela.ngerou.s she diel so at her own risk. The stage manager stateel that Mits Anderson, was ouo of 50 chorus gir's, anel all wore s milar shoes, which in every ca=e were made to measure, and the shoemaker attended on many oca&ions, when Miss Anderson could have had another pair hael she de« : red. And then, to ihe great %ratinoat : on t.f the spectators, the little «hming shots — " n particularly dainty pair" as one newparnr leniarks — were produced and bandfd up *o the presiding juelge, Mr Justice Dailing, who c.\rrrmied them iiic^r minutely wffi evident interest, nnd thc-n na-?v j 1 them oa to the jury, who Inspected theon v. ith equal thoroughness, while the spectator-- craned their heads and stretched their rck« to obtain a shaie of the fascinating =ighf. Mr Justice Darling summcT r.p •■' ; tli special fulness and care He -*ho\.cd Jhat one point of which much was u;n.!e v.ou.cl be equally favourable fo either c iel-^ — viz., the • sewing of elastic on the shoes, which the plaintiff contended proved rl at they f.id not fii., while the defendants maintained that this showed the knew them to bo tlingc-:oi'«.t l ingc-:oi'«. Miss Anderson might not have been m a povtion to resign when, according to the statement, other miop* were refined her. Slit} was not in the position of a prima (ioar.a who sometimes resigned if «he ('id no; crets enough applnuso ami bouquet-. Jsui he warned the jmy that - t had r.o right to give the girl a \erdiet at the defendant's expense merely b<Vnu.-^ it =ympat!ii-?d wall her. That caution wa« ail serv v. 1 1; .-mvi p: "per, hut it came, too idt^. 7 ho gul a»r! i:f j r shoes had already conquered the sust-.'-puHe hearts cf tho uiror*, ;ui I c he ohtal:i r c' a. prompt verdict; for £125. with cos:^. which, are understood to amount to a lik" 1 *',i>n. making £250 in all, as tho r-os! '•f ibit - m>!e pair of "patent lc.ith<i- rourr -hot-- -».itii extra-high h"*U." Her; about tn^se V."is, hy the byo? Is it nor quite ;-c.---ib!o that they may la\e done tho mi c e!>!i_r.' Howeier, the judge refused a stay of execution, and so the charming Miss Anderson went on her way triumphant, leaving the defendants to lament their woe.