The Express.
London, England, 1865-05-15 00:00:00

-- - -
THE LAW &)F PUBLICVMRTAIiiMENTIt

Ou Saturilnyi Mr. Vaughan, the Kitting magi's-
trati at Biw.stret t Police•coure, bad before him two young
mw eharpd with making &distil/banes in he.ect-roons
at Ems's, is etreeet-geidea. It appears that the defend-
, ants bad biased me of the gagers, and were asked to desist,
when they ref need. They wire told that if they did not
like the @losing they might hare their mow) back, but
they would not be allowed to create a disturbance
and interrupt the performance. Oa behalf of the
defendants, it was stated that they biased IS
others did Manes they did not like the song. Ilr.Vaughan
acted them M., the charge of hiring being implicated
with another for esesult upoe the waiters. The magistrate
said he was " not prepared to say that the defendants had
sot a right to his, but from the moment they were
offered their money beck, they had no right to make a die.

terrace.*
This dictum leaves the law of public, entertalanseale
very obscure. at a time when obscurity is ironvenient. On
all hands we hear complain* that a
for belthouging h theamused,
publie
were sever so willing to pay w
the character of our public earrtainments is going
down through the leniency of the critics the in-
dulgence of audiences. This Is especially the can with our
theatres, and it is lamented that the pit has lest the faculty
of " damniag," the exercise of which for many years had so
wholesome an offer on the drama. This weakness has her
carried so far that lately when a bad pros was hired on
the Ent night, the astonished manager came forward and
denounced the dimprobatioe ander evidenrof a malicious
conspiracy. If, however, the right to hiss is doubtful it la
Berber matter, and the silence of the muoh-
enduring public may be evidence of prudence in-
stead of weakness. But oar what ground can a parrs
who provides a public entertainment complain when
a portion of the audience wipers disapprobation?
It used to be understood that the public performer, the
player or singer, offered himself to the federalist, or r our
fathers used to say, the "Denson' of the audience, and bar
with equal meekness the disapprobation and the applause. It
is natural that masers shoukl wish that while pieudite were
free, hires might be contraband ; but if they were far-
sighted, they would desire that the expression of opiairm
should be uttered, for it is their best guide. Disapprobation
of a particular song, or drama, should not be taken, as
some managers seem inclined to take it, as • sign of Ur&
lit). A man may be mooed for an hour is a hail et
a theatre and applaud the performers, and thee Bed some-
thing to disapprove. Mr. Vaughan saes that if the managers
offer to return the money the right of hissing ceases, sup•
polling it to have existed previously. We suspect, however,
that this arrangement would not work in practice ; beside*,
it looks like buying off demo opinioe. As the magistrate
hes left this case, it seems that the saes at a singing and
supper room bored of being regarded as a work of art and
skill to be submitted to liberal opinion, is entitled to the
same exemption from criticism es the devilled kidney or the
punch to which it is an acoompanimeat, and neither of
which must he publicly impeached, for the sand of the good
name of the house. But eves they may be net back if
they do not 'gaiety the expectations of the vieitor. We do
not wish to be understood en quatioreg the substantial
jastice of Mr. Vaughan's decision in this case, although
the general principle he leyedown seems open to criticism.