PEERESS IN COURT

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18622, 18 July 1930, Page 2

PEERESS IN COURT

BARONESS TO PAY £425. “Large houses are a drug on the market. When you make syndicates and things one does not know where the money goes.” These statements were made by Baroness de Strabolgi, of Princes Gate, Knightsbridge, in the course of the hearing before Mr Justice Swift, in a London Court recently, of a claim for £425, for rent, brought against her by Mr Arthur Rains, an auctioneer, who was appointed receiver of the property by a firm of solicitors. Judgment was given against Lady de Strabolgi for the amount claimed, with costs.

Sir Patrick Hastings, K.C., for Mr Rains, said that the claim was for two quarters’ rent, but the amount involved in the action was much larger, because if Mr Rains succeeded it would mean that rent over a long period would be payable. Lady de Strabolgi and a Mr R. Muller was interested in a concession connected with Honduras, and for that purpose they wanted to borrow £SOOO They approached the solicitors in question. Mr Muller was the lessee of a house in Princes Gate at a comparatively small rent. He suggested that he could obtain permission and sub-let it on a much larger rent to Lady de Strabolgi—£Bso a year, which was a full rent for these premises—and that he could execute a mortgage in favour of the solicitors.

The £SOOO was paid into the joint account of Lady de Strabolgi and Mr Muller. The Honduras concession did not come to pass, but Lady de Strabolgi and Mr Muller drew out money from the bank. Since then nobody had paid anything. Lady de Strabolgi, in evidence, said that she was not a party to the mortgage. She agreed to rent the house at £BSO a year on condition that she had a licence to convert the premises into flats. She looked on it purely as a business transaction.

“I said that it would be no good to me unless it could be divided up,” witness added. “These large houses are a drug on the market. I was not prepared to take the premises unless I had the licence. It would be a dead loss.” The promise to get the licence was never carried out and she had never taken possession. Cross-examined by Sir Patrick Hastings, Lady de Strabolgi said that she did not know until the mortgage was completed how Mr Muller was borrowing the £SOOO. Sir Patrick Hastings: Where has the £SOOO gone?—When you make syndicates and things one does not know where the money goes.

Mi- Justice Swift, giving judgment for Mr Rains, said that the whole proceedings in the case were full of suspicion. Mr Muller and Lady de Strabolgi were interested in a syndicate. They desired, equally interestedly, to raise £SOOO. The way in which it was suggested they should get that £SOOO was by Mr Muller mortgaging his lease. “I have not the least hesitation,” said Mr Justice Swift, “in coming to the conclusion that Lady de Strabolgi and Mr Muller together arranged this system by which they were to induce the solicitors to part with the £SOOO. "The £SOOO went into the joint banking account of Lady de Strabolgi and Mr Muller. It was drawn out for their purposes, a great deal of the money going directly to the baroness, and when the whole of the money had gone and it was impossible for the solicitors to get the money back out of that banking account, for the first time the suggestion was made about the agreement between her and Mr Muller to obtain a licence from the landlord to convert these premises into flats. “I do not believe one word about the alleged agreement between the baroness and Mr Muller.”