WHO SHOULD PAY?

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 16376, 25 June 1927, Page 2

WHO SHOULD PAY?

BRIDE'S TROUSSEAU '' ADVANTAGEOUS MABHIAGE '' LONDON, June 15. The liability of the father of a society bride- to pay for the trousseau for what the plaintiff's counsel, Mr. llolman Gregory, K.C., described as "an advantageous marriage" in 1925, was among the points raised before Mr. Justice Talbot in the King's Bench Division of the High Court today, when Miss Norah Cvampton, a West- End court dressmaker, surd Mrs. Kidston, wife oi Lieutenant G. P. Glen Kidston! a brother-in-law of Lord Darnley, for £2BB being the balance of a bill ioV*£4l9 for her trousseau, and including the bridesmaids' dresses. Mr.' Gregory said the' defendants father, Mr. Edward Rowland .Soames, when the action commenced, filed an affidavit declaring that his daughter bad been under age when she gave the order, and he had been made a party to the action because it had been discovered that he had given his daughter authority to purchase the trousseau. It was argued that cither the father or the daughter was liable, because (lie goods were necessaries. v The daughter wrote to Miss frampton f/om Paris, enclosing £SO. and adding, "Send th« bill for the wedding dress. £3l. to Daddy. I will pay the rest." .Soames paid for the dress, and pleaded that this was the extent of his liability. Mi.ss Orampton gave evidence that the. dresses were by no means extravagant for the occasion. Cross examined as to whether she, thought Soames was wealthy, she answered that she did not know what wealthy meant. "If he lives in Chester Square" lie can't be poor, and he certainly should be able to dress his daughter for her wedding," she declared. Judgment was given for the defendants, Soames only being allowed costs.