GATE CRASHES

Hokitika Guardian, 6 February 1930, Page 3

GATE CRASHES

AT PEER DAUGHTER’S BALL

LONDON, December 6

References to “gate crashers” and tlie Champagne they drank were made in the King’s Bench Division yesterday when the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Hewart, and a special jury heard an action arising out of the coming-out ball for tlie daughter of Viscount and Lady Falkland.

The May Fair Hotel Company, Ltd., of Berkeley-street, W., sued Lord and Lady Falkland for £696 said to be due mainly in respect of tlie ball, dinner, and supper held at the hotel on June 15, 19Y8. Lord Falkland’s address was given as the Carlton Club, Pall Mall, 8.W., and Lady Falkland’s as Bronipton-arc-ade, Brompton-road, Chelsea, S.W.

Counsel in the case are: For the hotel company, Sir Patrick Hastings K.C. and Sir Albion Richardson; for Lord Falkland, Mr Norman Birkett, K.C., and Mr W. T. MoUckton; for Lady Falkland, Mr IT. 1. P. Hallett.

LORD FALKNER’S PLEA. Sir Albion Richardson (junior counsel for the May Fair Hotel Company) announced that Lady Falkland had put in ho defence of the proceedings, but Mr Hallett said he was tliere to represent her. . Sir Albion remarked that, in his defence, Lord Falkland pleaded that the function was arranged without his authority by his wife, who had no power to pledge his credits. Sir Patrick Hastings, Tv.O. opening the case for the May Fair Hotel Company, said that tlie Avliole question was who should pay for the function which was arranged by Lady Falkland aiid was attended by Lord Falkland as well as by his wife and daughter. Lord Falkland repudiated the responsibility for the ball, and Sir Patrick said that he would ask the jury to find that Lord Falkland always was responsible. that lie so conducted himself that the hotel company would think he was liable.

, ARRANGING THE BALL. \ In January 1928 Lord and Lady Falkland were living together in the ordinary way at their house in Sloanestroet, S.W., and Lady Falkland visited the hotel. She informed the management that slie desired to arrange for the coming-out ball of her daughter. in the following June. The ballroom suite and adjoining r-’orns were engaged for June 15.

Naturally, said Sir Patrick, the hotel management did not write to Lord Falkland asking him whether all that his wife was doing was being done with his approval. If they had the answer would probably have been a- curt one.

On May 19, Lady Falkland and twelve other people had luncheon at the hotel. The Bill (£2l odd) was signed by Lady Falkland and formed one of the item in the present claim.

For the ball the floral decorations were red throughout, and a first-class band was engaged. Tlie hall was a great success.

r Tf AMPAGNE AND THE WEATHER

It was noticed, when the hill was! sent to Lady Falkland, that 438 per-'j sons attended instead of about tlie 250 arranged for, j Mr Norman Birkett, K.C., (for Lord Falkland: “Gate-crashers” must havoj been present. (Laughter.) Sir Patrick: We know that' they helped to drink the champagne. (Laughter.) Continuing Sir Patrick said; A question arose about the champagne consumed, the account containing a charge lor 168 bottles.

“That amount between 468 people who had supper in the buffet represents one-third of a bottle per person,” commented the hotel management in its letter on the subject, and it added: “That is not a lot for functions of this description, especially in view of the hot weather.” (Laughter.) On November 6, said & v ir Patrick, the bill was again rendered and Lady Falkland, writing from the Continent, said it would be attended to when she returned to England. She expressed her satisfaction at the way the ball was carried out.

LORD FALKLAND AND THE BILL

Eventually, as no payment was made by Lady Falkland, the 'bill was sent to Lord Falkland.

In a letter to the hotel company, Lord Falkland’s solicitors wrote: “Lord Falkland never authorised the expenditure for the ball; indeed, he expressly forbade his wife to incur the expenses.” In answer to interrogatories, said Sir Patrick, Lord Falkland had admitted that he was present at the ball. It was at the express wish of Lady Falkland that he attended.

“It would appear,” observed Sir Patrick, “that Lord Falkland, his friends, and his family thoroughly enjoyed the ball and the refreshments, yet lie now says he expressly forbade 1 1 is wife to arrange it.” Mr Herbert G. Rendell, assistant manager at the hotel, said that Mr A. Wooley-Hart, who lived in Devonshireplace, W., made some of the arrangements for the ball on Lady Falkland’s behalf. He was a rich man and a friend of the family. For instances, he arranged about the wines to be drunk. Mr Birkett asked Mr Rendell whether he knew that, in November 1928. Debenham and Co., of Wigmorestre'et, W., obtained judgment against Lady Falkland for £244.