A PANTOMIMIC ABSURDITY.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7296, 8 January 1902, Page 2

A PANTOMIMIC ABSURDITY.

At the Southwark County Court not long ago the principal of the Three Montroses, a troupe of pantomim&sts, acrobats and tumblers, sued Frank Macnaughten, the owner of several provincial music-haHs, to recover £36 for breach of contract. The point ab issue was whisther the defendant was justified in cancelling an agreement in consequence of the plaintiff's action in substituting his wife for one of the original members of, has troupe, who had impersonated a female, and in altering an act. A The defendant said the alteration was a decided failure. He contracted for a grotesque acrobatic performance, and, without receiving any notice, found that the plaintiff had substituted: a pantomime act. Three people sat at a meail and a chicken was brought" on and immediately switched off by a piece of string, after which an inflated bladder was put on to represent a plum puddling. Or\e of the men stuck his fork into this and it collapsed. (Laughter.) It was a most "dire" performance, almost pathetic. (Laughter.) It was ridiculous and inane. Mr Harrison, the defendant manager at Halifax, said the plaintiff's wife came on to the stage with, a hole in 'her stocking. (Loud laughter.) His Honor : The hole in the stocking the audience might not mand, but what about the performance? (Laughter.) — It was absolutely off. His Honor : What sort of an audience have you? — The finest in the world. They witl laugh at anything. (Laughter.) Hh> Honor: And did) they not laugh at v 'iis? — No, sir; they walked out. li- Cannot: Does your remark about .iv audienoe apply also to the Hailifax newspaper? — I don't want to say anything about newspapers, - but I know they often send their office boys to report the per^ formanoe. (Laughter.) In the result his Honor said the change was such as to entitle the defendant to cancel the contract, and gaive judgment for him, with costs.