The Press. — London, England, 1854-02-25 00:00:00

178 the season. I remember the announcement of Wagner. There was a very great ham est excited. When she was announced for Covent Garden all applications were suspended. There is a great expense inenrred in getting up an opera. Cross-examined : We had the beat company that could be got. I cannot say I have not known a worse cowpony. I do not know the terms of Soutag's engagement. On Jenny Linil's nights the stalls let for three guineas a night. The pr.ce was never so great on any other occasion. The plaintiff had ninety boxes left upon his hands iu 1852. They did not lot at all. They were on the upper tiers, and never let except upon very full nights. In 1852 lie had seven boxes on the grand tier. In 1847 he had twelve on that tier. From 1847 to 1854 be had been disposing of boxes as property boxes in perpetuity, and he had lower in 1852 than he bad in 1847. There are forty-three boxes on the grand tier; thitty-six of those were out of his holding. On the pit tier there arc forty-two boxes, and in 182 lie had eight of those. On bad nights the booksellers undersell us--gentlemen dispose of their boxes. On great nights the parties are always there themselves. Re-examined : We had first-rate artistes in 1852. There was . . a company to support Wagner had she come. The town gets tired of ~eeing the same face 1, and novelty must be procured at any expense. John Alleroft : I sin a musket publisher. I have dealt with the theatre for twelve years. I have taken boxes to the average of 5,0001. a year at the plaintiff's theatre. 1 was about to renew my contract in 1852, but the extent was 1521., in consequence of Wagner not coming. lied she come I should have subscribed largely. I never knew so bit a season as 1852. Cross-examined : The company was weak, but the star was not there. I merely had nightly lettings in 1852. 1 never heard her sing. Re-examined : The company would have been very brilliant had Wagner come. The taking away the star prevents the per formance of certain operas. Somo witnesses were called to prove the amount of outlay incurred by the plaintiff on the faith of Mlle. Wagner's appearance : Henry Mepleson, librarian and transcriber at the plaintiff's theatre,receive.l instructions to prepare the music in the Prophite and the Huguenots, and put it in hand. The expense of the two was 2501. The choruses were in rehearsal for live or six weeks. The pieces were never produced. Adolphe Gents, chorus-master of the plaintiff's theatre, re ceived instructions to rehearse the music in the Peophite, the Hugisersote, and the Capeletti. The chorus was composed of sixty performers. Grace Bradney, superintendent of the wardrobe at the plain tiff's theatre, had orders to prepare dresses for those three operas. I employed forty hands in preparing the dresses. The expense was very great, 2001. or 3001. Cross-examined: The dresses remained. One part was used for other operas. Thoy were all entirely new. The defendant's case rested chiefly upon allega tions setting forth that he had been in treaty with Mlle. Wagner before Mr. Lumley ever communi cated with her ; that he abstained from all inter ference as soon as he learnt that the plaintiff had inducal her to take an engagement, and only re newed the treaty when he found the opening of her Majesty's Theatre delayed and doubtful; and that before he concluded the engagement with Mlle. Wagner she assured him that the contract with Mr. Lumley was void, and showed him the clause enjoining payment of the WM. advance on a day named, the breach of which he was told had annulled the whole agreement. Mr. Gye, who appeored as a witness, was examined at great length upon these points. After detailing the progress of sundry earlier and abortive treaties with the Wagners, he gave the following account of the interview at which the contract was finally concluded Never attempted to induce Mlle. Wagner to break her engage ment with Mr. Lumley. Knew simply that her engagement was for three months. No communication took place between them Lam October, Dill, until the month of March following. Heard then that Mr. Lumley was in difficulties. Wrote to her on the oth of March. Asked her if she could give a few performances at Covent Garden after her engagement at the other theatre, but got no answer. Went to Berlin, but did not find Mlle. Wagner, and then proceeded to Hamburg. Arrived in Hamburg on the rah of April. Saw her and her father. Thought the first ques tion he asked was, why they had not written to him. Mlle. Wag ner said, in French, that she was free. Inquired into particu- lars, and she told him that, according to the contract entered Into with Mr. Lumley, he was bound to pay her 3001. on the 15th of March. She said she was then free to make an engagement with hint. In the course of the interview saw the copy of her agreement with Lumley. Offered an engagement, and she asked the terms. He offered her 2,0001. for two months, end a month's salary in advance. There was some conversatlon amongst the friends there, and it resulted In their agreeing, and his taking a sheet of paper to write the engagement. It was dated the sth, mid a receipt for 1,0001. was also dated on the sth. Thought that, when making an engagement on the ground that the previous contract was broken, he should satisfy himself of the fact that there was such a provision, and accordingly asked them to show hint Mr. Lumley a contract. Saw part of the controot turned down ; they showed him the clause which was to the effect that Mr. Lumley was to pay the 3001. by the 15th of March. Bead that "Wise, but did not read any more of the contract but that particular clause. It was stated to him that the contract was broken, or that Mr. Lumley had broken his contract, in conse quence of the nonpayment of the 3001. The Wagners asked if he had any objection to give them what meant in English an in demnity, and he said, "Not the least." On the indemnity and cheque being given, and the contract signed, he left Hamburg. Mlle. Wagner asked him If lie could not wait a day or two longer, in case Lumley should send the money. Witness said he could nut; that lie had done that which lie hail never done before, and that was to leave the theatre during the season, and that had al ready lost more time than lie had expected to do on starting. No person informed him there had been any extension of time teethe commencemont of Mlle. Wagner's engagement. Did not hear of any extension of time for the payment of money, nor any thing about r letter (coin Hitcher that he had got the money. Did nut hear of it until the Chancery proceedings. Some legal evidence touching the subsequent pro ceedings in Chancery, by which an injunction was obtained prohibiting Mlle. Wagner front performing at any theatre except by the plaintiff's consent, and to the abortive attempts to obtain that lady's own evi dence by a commission issued to take the examina tion in Berlin, having been adduced, Sir F. Thesiger replied on behalf of the plaintiff; and Lord Camp• bell, summing up, left it with the jury to decide THE PRESS. upon three several "counts." Retiring at four o'clock on the third day of trial (Wednesday), they returned at half past five with the following verdict:— Upon the question, whether the agreement between plaintiff and Mlle. Wagner remained in force on the bth of April, when the agreement was signed between her and the defendant, they found for the plaintiff iu the affirmative. Upon the second question, whether defendant induced Mile. Wagner to break her agreement with the plaintiff the jury also found for the plaintiff in the affirmative. Upon the third question, whether the defend• ant knew that the agreement between the plaintiff and Mlle. Wagner remained a binding agreement when he entered into an agreemegt with her on the tith April, they found in the negative fur the defendant. This finding was equivalent to a general verdict for the defendant. A LARGE SEIZURE OF GUNPOWDER to the amount of 1,2001b5. was effected on Saturday by the police, who had traced the article from Messrs. Pigon's gunpowder works to the premises of a Mr. Clemmitt, the railway canier, in the Old Bailey. The powder was made up in separate parcels, and addressed to different parties in the country, and Mr. Clemmitt explained that they were only retained on his premises until the pressure of business allowed him to forward them to their destination. The aggregate quantity being, however, much above that allowed by the law to be kept in any house in the City, the powder was seized, and the proprieter summoned to give ex planation at the Guildhall. On Tuesday the charge was accordingly investigated, and it was pleaded for Mr. Clemmitt that the powder had been in his keeping more in transitu for conveyance into the country. This plea was admitted in respect of ten casks, but disallowed as to nine, which it was shown had remained for three weeks on his premises. These casks, therefore, were forfeited, and the penalty of 2s. per lb., making about 011., inflicted by way of fine. Mr. Clemmitt gave notice of appeal. . gittibtuts anb Offouts. AN EXTENSIVE CONFLAGRATION broke out on Sun day morning on the farm premi , es of Mr. Scovell, of Bishopstoke, near Southampton, and in the space of a short time spread with inconceivable rapidity, de stroying the farmhouse, three cottages, the out buildings, barns, and several corn and hay stacks. Some pigs and a quantity of poultry also fell a prey to the flames. Luckily the owner is fully insured. A MOST DARING ROBBERY was committed on Tues day upon the person of a gentleman in the City, from whom Bank of England notes, &c., to the amount of upwards Gf 4001. were stolen. He took his seat in a City omnibus, and the only person who sat near him was a yoing man who got out in Cheap side. On alighting at his destination the gentleman discovered that he had been robbed of a pocket-book containing 2001. in motes, a bill of exchange for s2l. 10s., and a cheque for 801. A reward of 1001. has been offered for the apprehension of the thief, A FEARFUL COLIIERY EXPLOSION resulting in the sacrifice of more than a hundred lives occurred at Wigan on Saturday afternoon. The catastrophe happened in the Arley Mine, belonging to the Ince hall Coal and Cannel Company, and was only eleven months ago the scene of a similar accident, in which fifty-eight persons perished. All that is known of the present tragedy is, that at three p.m. on the day named the workmen engaged round the mouth of the pit became aware that the firedamp had ex ploded in the galleries beneath. Fortunately the guiding-rods and winding apparatus were uninjured by the blast, and the winding of the "cage " was at once commenced. The sulphurous air which in variably follows an explosion of firedamp, and the mass of materials loosened by the blast lying about, for some time pre-ented the men who descended from penetrating far in the workings in search of the living and dead. At length fourteen persons were wound up alive, but in a faint and pitiable state. They had remained together in an airway for several hours until the atmosphere became less suffocating. These are all that were rescued out of about 130 who were at work in the shaftings at the time. THE BARQUE Countess of Derby was wrecked in Moreton-bay on the 31st of October last. The cap tain, crew, and passengers were all safely landed at Brixham by the Raven. A FLAX -MILL, in the occupation of Mr. Wilson, in Water-lane, Leeds, was completely destroyed by fire on Tuesday night. The loss will be considerable, as both building and contents were entirely consumed. A NEW SAFETY MINING-LAMP has been invented by M. de St. Simon Sicard, and patented both in England and France. It is an adaptation of the hydro-oxygen lime light, and, unlike the " Davy " lamp, is hermetically sealed when placed in the hands of the miners, through whose want of care in opening the lamps to get a better light the greater part of these shocking occurrences may be attri buted. By a supplemental apparatus, this lamp can be made to light the whole of the galleries of a mine, thus placing the means whereby these accident s t a k e p l ace entirely out of the reach of the unskilled pitman.) SATURDAY, IRON AND WOOD. THE recent disastrous wrecks of iron-built ships have given new stimulus to a controversy which has been long pending respecting the comparative advantages of iron and of wood as a material for shipbuilding. To this subject the Times had devoted more than one leading article, and after alluding to the loss of the Tayleur, which after striking " went down like a cannon-ball," drew a further illustration from the fate of the Birkenhead troop ship, which " broke her back on a reef as you might break a stick across your knee," and then went down in two parts, stein and stern. Both of these vessels, adds the Times, were iron -built, and the question is then appended whether similar results would have followed if they had been constructed of wood. To this question a negative answer is evidently inferred ; but Mr. Lindsay, the eminent shipowner, gives from his own extensive experience a correction of this erroneous conclusion. He states, in a letter addressed to our contemporary : " Had both these vessels been built of wood the result would, no doubt, have been the same. The former (the Tayleur) during a severe gale was dashed with great vio lence against a precipitous rock, on which it would appear one bilge hung, while under the other bilge there were some seven fathoms water. The latter, going at the rate of eight or nine knots per hour, struck in midships on the sharp point of a rock, with deep water below either extremity and all round. Neither wood nor iron, nor any other material, could resist for even five minutes shocks so extraordinary and so appalling as these. At the very mo ment they struck their bottoms must have been rent open and, had they been constructed of wood, the holes would have been unquestionably larger, as the force of the blows would have shattered the ',hulking and timbers for many feet on either side of the particular spot that first struck the rock; whereas, if the bottoms of the Tayleur and the Birkenhead could nowbe inspected, it would be found that even the plates adjoining those which struck the rocks were perfectly sound. This has been clearly illustrated in the case of the iron steam-ship Great Britain. That vessel lay on the open coast of Ireland a whole winter, exposed to every gale, and, when at last she was removed from that dangerous strand, her bottom was quite sound, with the exception of the particular parts where she had bumped or grounded upon the rocks. But how very different were the results in the case of the wooden steam-ship Demerara. I believe no stronger vessel was ever built of wood than that steam-ship ; yet after getting on shore in ballast trim on the bank—an uneven and rocky bank, it is true—of the river Avon, where no sea or gale could injure her, every plank and timber were so shattered by her own weight that she was condemned as a total wreck. On the other hand, and in the case of fire, had the steamship Amazon been built of iron instead of wood, the annals of the sea would not have recorded so dreadful a tragedy. " I have for many years directed particular attention to this subject, and there is no question on my own mind that in the very essential points of strength and safety, as w ell as speed, capacity, and durability, iron is greatly su perior to wood in the construction of merchant vessels. It has long been a plausible and popular error that if two ships, one of iron, the other of wood, with the same de scriptions of cargo on board, were both scuttled, the latter would remain above the water longer than the former. We all know that wood will swim, but the thing is absurd to imagine that iron can swim.' This has been a very common expression, and has almost invariably been an swered by the very striking and pointed retort—' Try them.' I'eople knew it was useless to try, for they knew that a piece of wood did swim, and that a piece of iron sank. But a fact now as well established appears by many to be quite overlooked, that iron, in the shape of a ship, floats more buoyantly than wood in the same shape, and of the same dimensions." Mr. Lindsay adds, in reference to some suggested improvements in the art and practice of navigation : " I have often thought it strange that, in the present advanced state of science, the mode of shortening sail should remain much the same as it was a hundred years ago. There have been many patents, but nearly ell have proved of little practical value. Mr. Cunningham had the courtesy to send me, some few days since, full particulars of his ' contrivance, whereby topsails are reefed and un reefed from the deck in a few minutes without the necessity of sending a man aloft.' It appears to me very ingenious and very simple, and I intend to embrace the first spare opportunity of seeing it practically tested. When I have done so "I may venture to give my opinion of the results. " The suggestion that sailing-ships should be towed out by steam tugs into the Atlantic would certainly tend to lessen the danger; but during heavy gales of wind, and with a high sea running, when the danger is most imminent, especially when approaching a lee shore, a steam-tug could prove of very little service, and would in many cases be a cumbrance. Besides, it would so greatly enhance the current expenses of voyage that the rates of freight and passage money would be thereby increased. However, for my own part I would gladly pay a steamer to accompany any of my ships to sea if the shippers and passengers by her would pay a rate in proportion higher than they paid to those vesselswhich clid not accept the services of a steam. tug." MAILS AND RAILS. THE incessant delays that have arisen in the distri bution of letters by the General Post-office for some time past have occasioned continual complaints from the trading classes in London. Under the impulse of these remonstrances the Post•ofce authorities have made inquiries and taken steps with the view 7 0 " \