“A VOICE THAT WAS.”

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17013, 11 April 1923, Page 7

“A VOICE THAT WAS.”

MISS LETT’S LIBEL ACTION. by Telegraph—Press Association -Copyright Australian anti N.Z. Cable Association. (Received April 11, 11.5 a.m.) LONDON, April 10. The .Phyllis Lett case has been settled, the defendant agreeing to destroy the records ami not to issue any master records unless giving the date on which the songs were sung, and to pay a liberal portion of Miss Lett’s legal expenses. A novel libel action was brought by Miss Pliyllis Lett against Pathe Freres in connection with the issue of old gramophone records made in 1910, which she claims do not represent her voice as it is to-day. Miss Lett’s counsel said that the records were made ten years ago and had lost much in quality. He mentioned that many singers were engaged for provincial tours on the strength of gramophone records, and Miss Lett’s provincial engagement, which had been increasing by leaps and bounds, dropped as the result of defective records. Unpleasant newspaper criticism of the records had led to her present action. The imputation was that she was a singer of no importance and with no artistic ability. Mr Justice Lush remarked: “It in difficult to see how to get a libel out of that. It requires a little consideration.” Counsel: “What the plaintiff complains of is that the records should have been issued and marked as new.” Sir Landon Ronald (the famous oom- • poser and conductor) gave evidence I that the records were awful and lie | thought that it would he extremely bad I lor Miss Lett’s reputation. I Miss Lett gave evidence that when «he heard the new record she was horrified. Counsel for the defence said that Pathe Freres had offered to put the date on future records. Miss Lett: “ But the damage is done. Hundreds of records have been issued.”