Peer Sued for £69O—Cost of Dance

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 880, 25 January 1930, Page 18

Peer Sued for £69O—Cost of Dance

ATE - CRASHING, the trials of society hosm l ij tesses, champagne and B jjZfj a "coming-out” ball of a peer's daughter were discussed in the King’s Bench Division, before the Lord Chief Justice, when Lord and Lady Falkland were sued by the May Fair Hotel Company. Limited, of Whitehallplace, S.W.. for £G9O, the price of a dinner, dance and supper. Lord Falkland's address was given as tbe Carlton Club, and Lady Falkland's as Brompton Arcade. Brompton Road, S.W.

Sir Albion Richardson, for the May Fair Hotel, said that Lady Falkland had not delivered a defence to the action, and Lord Falkland denied that the ball, supper and dinner were given, and said that if they were given they were ordered by Lady Falkland, who had no authority to pledge his credit. Sir Patrick Hastings, K.C., who appeared with Sir Albion, said that the question was who should pay for the function, which was arranged by Lady Falkland on the occasion of the coming oat of her daughter. Lord Falkland, as well as his wife and daughter, was present, but he now repudiated liability. He asked the jury to find that Lord Falkland was responsible, and that he had acted in such a way that the hotel company would think that he was liable.

In January, 1928, when Lord and Lady Falkland were living together at their house in Sloane Street. W., Lady Falkland visited the May Fair Hotel

i and said that she wished to arrange a ball for her daughter’s coming out in the following June. She engaged the ballroom suite and adjoining rooms for June 15. Sir Patrick added that the hotel management did not write to Lord Falkland asking whether what his wife was doing was done with his approval. If they had done so the answer would probably have been curt. The arrangements were carried out, and on May 19 Lady Falkland had lunch with 12 other people at the hotel to discuss things. The bill for the meal was signed by Lady Falkland and was one of the items now claimed. The ball, said Sir Patrick, was a great success, and it was noticed that 468 persons, instead of 250 arranged for. attended. “Sometimes society hostesses find that more people attend this kind of function than are bargained for," commented Sir Patrick. Hot Weather Drinks Mr. Norman Birkett, K.C., for Lord Falkland, remarked that “gatecrashers” must have been present. Sir Patrick Hastings; We know that they helped to drink the champagne. He added ihat Lady Falkland did not answer the letter containing the account, and another account was sent. A query was raised about 168 bottles of champagne charged for in the bill, and the hotel management wrote: “That amount between 468 people who had supper in the buffet represents one-third of a bottle a person. That is not a lot for functions of this

I description, especially in view of the hot weather,” The bill was again rendered in November, and Lady Falkland replied that it. would receive attention when she returned from the Continent. She expressed satisfaction with the way the arrangements for the ball were carried out. Eventually, as payment had not been made by Lady Falkland, the bill was sent to her husband. Mr. H. I. P. Hallett intervened, remarking that he appeared on behalf of Lady Falkland. Sir Patrick Hastings; I think Mr. Hallett had better say nothing unless Lady Falkland intends to take part in this trial. He went on to say that Lord Falkland’s solicitors wrote to the plaintiffs stating that Lord Falkland never authorised the expenditure for the ball but on the contrary he had expressly forbidden his wife to incur the expense. It was not until he received the letter containing the bill that he knew he was regarded as being liable. Lord Falkland had admitted in answer to interrogatories, said Sir Patrick, that he and some of his friends attended the ball, but he said he was present at the express wish of Lady Falkland. “It would appear,” said Sir Patrick, “that Lord Falkland, his friends And his family thoroughly enjoyed the ball and the refreshments, and yet he now says he expressly forbade his wife to arrange the ball.” Mr. H. G. Rendell, assistant manager of the May Fair Hotel, gave evidence that the hotel management