LEGAL LIGHT ON LEGS AND LADDERS!

NZ Truth, Issue 1183, 2 August 1928, Page 8

LEGAL LIGHT ON LEGS AND LADDERS!

Dainty Feminine Limbs, Sheathed In Shimmering Silk, Intrigue Bench, Bar and Pressmen WEIGHTY ARGUMENT OVER ROLLED STOCKINGS (From "N.Z. Truth's" Special. Auckland Representative.) ' STOCKINGS, STOCKINGS EVERYWHERE, but not one made to last . . There they were, m all their shimmering, deceptive loveliiiess, draping the tables and chairs m the prosaic atmosphere of the Auckland Magistrate's Court. Soft, sleek hose for the sinuous limbs of the fair, but not the product of the busy little silkworm. ' There, also, we're tall girls, trim girls, short girls, sure girls, plump girls, plain girls, blondes and brunettes, with an assortment of legs; shapely legs and legs not so shapely. These were the ballet girls from rival hosiery companies selected to display the laddered calf-coverings around which all the argument centred. "See 'em all," suggested counsel. But the bench decided that a thorough inspection of one pair of lustrous legs was quite enough for him. •

LEG show? No! Magistrate Hunt 1' ■' made, it clear that feminine limbs b must not be mixed up with the law — except m the abstract. Right enough m "Sunny," where you pay for your seats, but a free leg-show for courtroom deadheads was not to be encouraged. There were no loud cheers from the back of the court when the silkworm and the glow-worm ballet girls were banned as a- body from a public appearance. . ■' Banished, they remained m the drab witness-room, cooling their heels, the e winter winds blowing through their T ladders. . From the ' female viewpoint, it was "" not definitely settled whether stock- ° ings should be pulled on or rolled on, but the magistrate ruled that whatever „ way they went on, they should stick ' to their job. , h In the cold, legal language of such documents, it was set out that J. S. li Morton, trading as Larnock and Co., of a Auckland, agents, claimed to recover s from Frederick Ball^ and May Ball, of Franklin Road, trading under the name t of the Glow-worm Hosiery Co., the I sum of £25/3/6 for hosiery sold and t delivered. . " P Though the names of both parties were mentioned, the summons speclfi- l! cally stated that Morton claimed to a recover this sum from the separate v estate of the female defendant. The defendants, on the other ' hand, counter-claimed against Morton, the plaintiff, £75/18/- m respect of thirty dozen pairs of I hose sold by the plaintiff to the d defendant as pure silk, which were, v m fact, art silk. c Defendant also claimed for the con- ] tract price of £,48/17/6 for 28% dozen , art silk hose, which were warranted by tj him to be of goon quality, but which f were, m fact, of poor quality. £ Another £9/16/- was also claimed, this being the amount of a cheque given by Morton to Mrs. Ball m respect to an overcharge made by him — and a cheque which Morton stopped. All of which, boiled down, means that whereas Morton claimed £25/3/6 from the defendants, the latter claimed from plaintiff the sum ;bf £134/11/6. The first round took place on July 19 and it was very evident from the word go that there was more behind the case than met the eye of the casual observer. , Had the case been advertised, m fact, it is safe to say that there would have been a considerable. attendance of the silk-hosed sex, for it was, for them, full of meat. i • Hosiery Holiness Lawyer Singer put the ball of silk rolling with' some opening remarks ' setting. out the claim, as already explained. The defendant, or defendants, he said, were carrying on a business under the name of the "Glow-worm Hosiery Co." •_ They disposed of their goods, as he put it, "upon an unsuspecting public by means of a system of coupons." It was a system now m vogue . m Australia. On his feet, Lawyer Leary begged his learned friend to keep his remarks to the matter of the debt. "He has invited a member of a well-known paper to be present and he is talking for the Press." l ' . "I'll take the counter-claim first," announced Magistrate Hunt, Iwhereupon Mrs, May Ball entered t' the witness-box. She commenced by saying that she was the only proprietor of the Glowworm Hosiery Co., had been m business some time and had worked up a considerable connection. Proving herself a very level-headed witness, she smiled frequently as she gave her answers to the lawyers on c both sides. ■ ' v „ Morton, she said, had offered her ti certain merchandise. On June 5 he s offered her a line of pure silk half-hose o at 4/5 per pair. He represented himself to be a member of Lamock and ii Co. ; b Bulky brown-paper parcels boxes having been opened up, bundles n of shimmering,, flesh-colored stockings and multi-hued socks were disclosed. V Lawyer Singer examined' them expertly, lingeringly, and remarked: • ''They have a very nice feel." v "You can't have them; they are ti mine now," said Lawyer Leary. He continued: "The whole lot of stockings, ti lock, stock and barrel, are no use a whatever. It, is a straight-out 0 swindle; they won't wear and they go as soon .as the knee of the wearer fi is bent." " .. r Mrs. Ball's employees had "grabbed" t them as soon as they came into stock 1 ( on account of the. "pointed" heel.' They v bought them at cost, but brought them c back on the Monday m shreds. Some of the girls had come to his I office and put the stockings on there; *r they laddered straight away. There " were girls m, court waiting to show n their ladders. f) Lawyer Singer, brightly: "Will they appear?" v d Lawyer Leary held up a handful of h stockings, for the court to gaze upon. n ""Ladders m siik hose,"" opined Law- t yer Singer, "are attained by other means than perishing— by ■ mishand- £ iiiummimumiiiimiiiiuiiiiiiuiiiiiuiiiiiimifmiuiiiiiitiiiiuiiuiiiiniimimmnmmiiiimiiiimmmin "■ mini i i mini minimi iiiimimimimimimimiimiiiiiiiiiiimmiimi

ling." He was invited to try oh a pair by the Glow-worm's counsel. Mrs. Ball left the box to enable an expert of twenty-five years' experience, Ronald Arthur Kirkwood, of the firm of Howie and Armstrong, to give evidence. After an examination of the goods, he announced that they were of no Value. Delicate, dainty feminine hosiery was then picked up by three of Auckland's reputable legal men, who made efforts of varying degrees to tear them. <Kirkwood was the winner, Lawyer Leary a good second, while Lawyers Singer and Schramm made a poor fist of it. A pair being handed to Magistrate Hunt, he tried his luck, but admitted: "I have not the touch of the master hand."

Lawyer Leai-y: "I'm suspicious of a layman who knows anything about silk stockings."

Enter The Ballet

Questioned as to the profit on hose, Kirkwood said that the trade profit was generally fifty per cent

Lawyer Singer: "They are advertising to /give 18/- worth of goods when all they are giving Is about 11/---worth."

"That's part of your 'political campaign," retorted Lawyer Leary. "It's nothing to do with the case."

The late manager of Bond and Co., Lionel Lewis Cox, having given evidence, Lawyer Leary expressed his willingness to produce his ballet of eight damsels on whose legs the stockings had burst.

On the courtroom door being opened, the Glow-worm ballet crowded into the doorway, wreathed m smiles, their extremities decorated with glossy silk hose, which was in'turn ornamented with a variety of "ladders" and holes. Alarm spread like a. cloud on the face of Magistrate Hunt', and, as the temporary ballet-master, Lawyer Leary, made as if to par-

ade his laddered ladies, asking: is committing a deliberate untruth. "Shall I bring them all m together?" The lady does not desire to tell the his worship almost shouted: "No, court what she receives and what NOl We don't want them all m she delivers to the public." here — one will do!" Counsel desired to show that what The one chosen from so many prov- Mrs. Ball sent out cost 9/- and what ed to be a Miss Peebles,; she made her she received was 18/-. way smilingly to the witness-box and "She is not to be believed m a contold the horrid story of how the girls' flict of testimony. I want to show that stockings had, so to speak, "gone back she is not telling the truth m a most on them." vital matter. The reputable trade," Lawyer Leary held up a pair of hose counsel continued,, "lets you know what m dispute, remarking: "The rats have you are getting." been at them." Magistrate Hunt: "Every tradesman "That's one of the pair I was trying misrepresents to the public." my skill on," said Lawyer Singer. Lawyer Singer was most indignant: "Exactly," was the retort, "Thaf/3 "No, they don't, sir!" what I meant. You didn't get me!" "You say that what Morton sells is The witness wa-s invited to step down a reputable article?" asked Lawyer and show the Court her own exhibition Leary with polished politeness, of ladders. For some moments she "I say they were Bonds' — and she was the centre of much legal attrao- knew. She is a perjurer." tlon> "I dont know that she is," interruptThe legal men even bent their knees ed the magistrate. "This woman, who to her, not, perhaps, so much m horn- says she is being 'had,' has come here age as m order to obtain a better view and is prepared to show all her books of the faulty hosiery. because of a private dispute." The girl told counsel that all the it was then, perhaps, that Lawyer faults were not below the knee, but Leary saw his chance to let a cat out made it quite clear ■ . ' of the opposition that this was where . bag. "My friend is legal investigation j j j j r r t starting* out to would have to . I flddPYe.U. LiCLCLIZS blacken my client; cea g e . . M-AXUU^IK*\A i-ju.<ui\*3 his client ls being Miss Peebles step- backed by a rival ping down, Lawyer > company. The Leary began: "I call Miss — —." But question is whether they are good or Magistrate Hunt cut him short: "I'm bad socks." not going to have a whole lot of girls The bench poured a libation of oil called." It was plain the bench was on the rough legal seas: "I can assume "dead off" any ballet whatsoever. that she is making 150 per cent, if you Mary Muriel Ball resumed her cvi- »ke, Mr. Singer— and let it drop." deri.ce ,by telling the court that her Finally, at Lawyer Singer's express husband had no interest m the busi- wish, the magistrate took down three ness. He was on .salary! and collected questions, which, counsel said, he the mall. wanted on record. Morton, said Mrs. Ball,: told "her that They ran as follows: "(1) Is it ;a the stockings were "thoroughly reli- fact that 18/- is received by you as a able"; he could recommend them. result of the full, return for one of these 'On this, she ordered 28% dozen; advertising coupons?" when they arrived, she found them un- "(2) Is it a fact that you supply, as reliable- and would not send them out. a result of such return, art-silk stockTheir wrong classification being ings such as these" (indicating the pointed out to Morton, he promised to stockings m his hand), "or three paira write to his firm and have the, matter of art-silk which cost you"— Mrs. Ball put right. / \ interrupting: "2/10"— "and which retail To Magistrate Hunt, witness said: ordinarily at 3/11?" . . > "Two deals were satisfactory." "(3) Do you not purport, by your Following this, Mrs. Ball wrote to adv ** iß L" g a f° up ° n h ' *° s "l™ 1 ? ; " the firm of Larnock and Co., Welling- worth of value, whereas the value ton, on June 21, 1928, and drew atten-' ° f . the t ar ,{ lp J®i^-?/q S ? ?. le ' IS °" !y 8/6 ttoh to the "unsatisfactory nature of the and retail only ,1/97 r business" transacted by that firm This being taken down by the bench, through J. S. Morton. the S.M. remarked to Mvs. Ball: "I'll ■

She also informed the firm that the half-hose she had purchased from Morton proved to be art-silk instead of pure silk, and demanded the refund of £124/15/6.

The letter concluded: "The above art-silk hose, we find, are rubbish, several pairs of which have been returned to us after haying- been worn only once, and which I will, therefore, not supply to my customers." The silk hosiery rivals, and the waiting ballet, were then dismissed until Monday afternoon. Prior to the proceedings entering the second lap, it was noticed that a fresh ballet had made its appearance m the waitingroom. This was the Silkworm Company's troupe. " Mrs. Ball returned to the witnessbox and Lawyer Singer rose to do battle. The customary array of hosiery was once more m evidence and Mrs. Ball was as self - possessed a s ever. "It is your habit to take off marks and brands?" asked the lawyer.

"No," was the reply. And witness went on to say that she did not mark her goods "Glow-worm." Counsel: "People don't ask for Glowworm hosiery, you say?" — "No."

"Will you swear that on no occasion you have removed the brand from socks and. stockings?"— " Certainly, we don't."

"I am instructed that you gave instructions to Morton to remove the labels?"— "I did not."

Holding a pair of lady's stockings under Mrs. Ball's nose, the legal man suggested. "What you give II- for you retail at 11/-?" x Mrs. Ball was not at all disturbed. She answered: "According to the number of coupons they return, they get hose; if they return four coupons, I get 12/- and they get hose costing about 8/-."

Lawyer Singer (to the bench): "I'm out to show that* this woman

make note you are -hot going to answer them." Magistrate Hunt, having listened to further legal argument said he was| going on with the counter-claim. John Stewart Morton gave evidence that he was an agent and had been, six months In that line. His first j interview with Mrs. Ball was 'on June 4. ! The silk socks which he showed to the proprietress of the Glow-worm Company she considered too dear. He j then produced some art-sik half-hose; others of silk and wool, and cashmere. These he had obtained from Kemps' j at 3/9 and he quoted them to Mrs. Ball at 4/5. "She told me to remove all labels," said Morton. - Lawyer Singer: "Why?'V-"Because she was selling Glow-worm." Mrs. Ball would not give more than 8/-, but finally she bought a quantity which ran. into £48/17/6. She also wanted some pure silk, was shown a sample at 9/4 and asked for two dozen of them. Morton managed to obtain 1% dozen. These were procured from the Kayser' people, said witness. There was a search - for the receipt, which was ' said to exist, but it could not be discovered and was never produced. Then, both parties had made a mistake over a cheque; to put matters right, Mrs. Ball accepted Morton's cheque for £9/16/-, but she would not give him her cheque for £25. Therefore, he stopped his. He admitted that he, was not an expert m hosiery. Magistrate Hunt: "He's shown me nothing to prove that he delivered this 1% dozen. He's cooked that yarn up." . .] Cross-examined by Lawyer Leary, Morton was somewhat reluctantly compelled to admit that he had obtained the stockings m dispute from the Silkworm Hosiery Co. (a rival concern) and' had given 2/8 per pair for them. "Who runs the Silkworm?" asked Lawyer Leary. * But Morton did not know; he had only seen a young lady. Later, he had met a Mr. Coward. "Will you swear you didn't tell Mr. Coward who the stockings were for?" — "I'll swear." "I put it to you that Mr. Coward employed you as an agent?"— "He did not." ' "You'll have reason for an action against Mr. Coward ?"«— "Yes, if they are faulty, I shall." Herbert Walter Kingsland, who said he had many years' experience of the soft goods trade, thought the stockings m good order- and a cheap article. Living Exhibits On Lawyer Leary pointing out to him that 100 per cent, of them "laddered," he replied: "If you pay 2/10, you can't expect too much!" "No stockings are ladderproof," ■ was the substance of Alfred Respinger'e evidence. Being an importer, he ought to know. Robert William Holmes was another expert called, a manufacturers agent. The stockings were not defective, m his opinion. "In any case," announced the bench, "so far as the socks are concerned, I find m favor of Mrs. Ball." On the third day of the hearing the Silkworm ballet entered the courtroom — a charming quartet whose red, pink, blue and turquoise headgear, and pink cheeks lent quite a bright air to the proceedings. They desiufely took their seats under the critical eyes of the bench and lawyers. "My four living exhibits," announced Lawyer Singer, with some pride. Then, with a wave of his hand: "No tears or ladders — or anything like that." Lawyer Leary took him up; seemingly he had a knowledge of his subject. "No suspenders were used by these young ladies— they all used garters. They were coached as to how to put them on. They were rolled." This, the lawyer said, was not the normal way. Miss Peebles, being called, described the rolling process: "It's a manner m which I never put mine on," she said. Magistrate Hunt was told that the girls, had put the stockings on that morning. "They didn't sleep m them, said Lawyer Schramm. Giving judgment, the bench observed: "The evidence given by Morton did not satisfy me at a11. .. There is evidence that he did mislead Mrs. Ball with the idea that she was getting silk. Again, he contradicted himself. His statement as to the socks he sold— l% dozen — was an invention. Continuing; the S.M. added: "Two merchants say that the stockings are not marketable goods." "One, sir, not two," interjected Lawyer Singer. "Oh, well, one," continued Magistrate Hunt. "I believe.that one. I believe Mrs. Ball's version to be the correct one." Weighed up, the final verdict came to this- Mrs. Ball gained the decision on her counter-claim for £109, sonic odd shillings, plus £4/6/- costs; Morton will have his stockings returned to him when he refunds Mrs. Ball £25/3/6. It was a moral victory for the Glowworm Company.