Bryan daily eagle and pilot. [volume] (Bryan, Tex.) 1909-1918, 1910-12-16
English Court Refuses to Aid The
atricaI Press Agent.
Faxed Expulsion Of Women Who In
sisted on Wearing Big Hats In
Theater Called by Judge a
Fraud on Justice.

.ondon.-British courts OF justice
must not be exploited for the pur-
poses OF advertisement This legal de-
cision was given in a case brought by
Thomas Lumley Damn, a press agent.
against Frank Curzon, the theatrical
manager. The evidence revealed the
remarkable manner in which the pub
lie was "spoofed" over a certain matt
nee hat incident which occurred at the
Prince of Wales theater in London
some months ago. This incident was
manifestly fake to all those who are
initiated into the ways OF theatrical
advertisement.
Mr.. Damn In his action claimed $500,
which he alleged was the sum Mr.
Curzon agreed to pay him for arrang-
Ing the affair. while Mrs. Damn, who
assisted her husband In the affair,
claimed s262 in payment for her ser
vices. Mr.. Curzon admitted that he
agreed to the incident being arranged.
but denied that he agreed to pay these
sums.
S Juu6iucut VI jugs WOOuldii,
who tried the case, explains the ma
ture Of the incident. He said:
In the early part Of this year, when
the plaintiff was employed by the de-
fendant as his press agent, he sug-
gested to the defendant that II would
be an excellent advertisement both for
the theater and for the defendant as
manager. IL the following scheme were
carried out: Two ladies and a gentle
man were to be- engaged, the ladies
were to occupy two stalls and to wear
ultra-fashionable hats. The gentleman
was to occupy stall Immediately be-
hind them. and during the fall of the
curtain peremptorily demand of them
that they should take their hats of
The ladies were TO refuse, and the
gentleman to urgently and audibly in
sist. and the disturbance was to attain
such proportions that the defendant
should be sent for and invite the trio
outside in the corridor, and demand
of the ladies that they should remove
their hats or leave the theater: that
the ladies' should resist the demand.
that defendant should thereupon eject
them by technical assault OF laying
his hand on the shoulders of one OF
them; that the ladies should leave and
summon the defendant before a magis-
trate for the assault and that the de-
PENDANT should plead the right to
protect the convenience OF his sudi
ence.
The defendant consented. and the
scheme was carried out in every de-
tail. the price Of their seats-which
they had not paid for-was ostensibly
returned to the ladies', and in pursu.
ance of the plot they proceeded TO
summon the defendant for assault.
The magistrate heard the charge
and dismissed It, holding that the de-
PENDANT was justified In what he had
done. The plaintiffs now allege that
the defendant agreed to pay them for
their services In carrying out the ven.
ture.
Il am Of opinion that the agreement
alleged is illegal. being contrary to
public policy. and that no action is
maintainable upon It, And this for
two reasons: ~ The spectacle OF two
ladies being peremptorily and brusque-
ly treated might well have aroused In
terlocution on their behalf and led to |
serious breach Of the peace. (2) The