THE BARGE OWNER AND THE ACTRESS.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXII, Issue 8835, 11 June 1907, Page 4

THE BARGE OWNER AND THE ACTRESS.

The confidence oflvlr Charles Sturt, , a hargo owner, ■in the histrionic "onius of Miss Kitty Loftus led him ! to supply that talented actress with a sum of £BOO, which was sunk in an , unsuccessful theatre venture. Now lie wants it hack, saying it wits only a loan, but the jury Fin the King’s Bench Division, Loudon, returned a verdict for Miss Loftus. In her defence it was stated that the £3OO was not lent, but had been advanced by the plaintiff as a speculation in the theatrical production of ‘ A Maid ; ; from School. ” Ho was to have a portion of the profits, if any, but the money was not to be repaid. This was not the first time she had received money from plaintiff, said counsel. In 1890, when the plaintiff was only 18, and an engineer’s apprentice, ho went to the pantomime at Brighton, "whore the defendant was principal hoy. He admired her so much that he wrote to express his appreciation of her acting. Twelve years later he wrote reminding her of his previous letter, adding that he had travelled many a mile to see her play. Later, plaintiff wrote another letter of admiration, and enclosed a cheque,signed and dated, with the amount not filled in. Ho added: “If on Saturday night yon have a house full up put it m the fire. H it is a moderate house fill it up or £25. If a had houeso, £SO. O. o.

is not a rich man, or lie would send you £250. ” He also gave her £IOO to help Miss Loftus to tour with ‘ ‘ Naughty Nancy. ” The production of “A Maid at School” at Terry’s m 1904 resulted in a loss of £BOO, the play only running three weeks, hut plaintiff denied that he had put his £3OO in the play as a speculative investment. Miss Kitty Loftus herselt

appearediu the witness-box and denied that the ’money was anything else biit a gift, with the that if at the end of three weeks there was a profit he would take his share of the speculation. In cross-examination by Mr Shear-

man, Miss Loftus said that, although she had £BOO in the bank in the spring of 1904, she could not afford v:o risk that in the production of ‘ ‘ A Maid from School. ” Whoso was that £BOO you had m the hank!—My hard-earned money from a child. Miss Kity Loftns declared, with a smile, time Mr Sturt was eccentric at times. One night during the run of “A Maid from School” she saw her hargo-owuer admirer in the gallery. “I sent my manger ,to tell him to come and sit in a box, as it was such a poor house, and he might dress the place a bit. ” Are you suggesting that the whole of this claim for £3OO is a put-up-job?—Absolutely. _ “Do you sugges'that the law court is a serious or an entertaining place?” asked Mr Shearman. “Sometimes it is both. ” ( LaughIn further evidence Miss Loftns said she was carried on to the stage when she was three months old, and had been on the stage all her life. You have never been in a chorus? — No. Even the baby was a principal part. (Laughter.) She had maintained her mother and sister since the death of her father 13 Jyears ago. The jury found a verdict in her favour.