The Express.
London, England, 1860-02-16 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAI3.-Fu. 15.

Mims at Judos lerada•—( Baton Lord Chief
Lie • Avoid Jury.)
SOILL1•131 a. 110100211To—LICIVILTANT QUESTION FOR
DEALERS IN MA US.
The record is this ears was °laicise amplicated cha-
racter; bat tha qualm mind was that shortly stated
Wow.

lir7Laah Lod Mr. J. Brows appeared for the pistatiff ; sad
Mr. Hawkins sad Ms. Pearce fae t►e dahadant. _

The defendant was a whonsale grew fa Bodierd-street,
Strand, and be employed • broker, Mod ilosseLto pintoes
100 Behia shares, amd 2,0001. la the Turbid' par Cents.
The plaintiff sold :IS: shone, bat the mossy mot being
paid they were resold at a loss al 75111. Ma. The
plantiff not having npaymist of ads loss from Mr.
Momop, mow used the priaelpal kw whets Mr. llasop bad
send. The goodies mow wee whether, Ms. Memo having
sabred Into this sestroot ia his own name, his principal
mold be mode liable, sad It woe stated by the learned oounvel
that It was the first don the goodies bed arisen in reference
to stockbrokers, and that the matter was onsidand by the
amanitas of the Stock Exchange to be one of great im-
mertaace. There was no doubt about the general principle of
law sped from the Stock Meehan" aad in supposed that it
was intsaded to est up some memo of the Stock Exchange.
Mr. Eawldme said he believed that there was no question of
fest between them. nor did be hawed to set up any peculiar
asslome el the Stock
The Lad Chid Jusilkeisille.tinsaisly held that the principal
was hada, and gays kr. Hawkins leave to move.
• verdict was accordingly snared for the pblntilf for
Mi. 16a., subject to the opinion of the full court.

011 •. MVOIIII-THJI LW/TM OP MIR MAJESTY'S

THIATRI.

Tide was an anion to recover damages upon the ground
that the dehudant had not an agreement to demise
to kin bar Mejsetre
Mr. Lath, Mr. Coney, end Mr. Duman, appeared for
the plaintiff; end XL Barth, Mr. fkrinat Pigott, sad Mr.
Lloyd for the de inlet.
Mr. Loth, is opens the ONO, said that the
were very keg., yet the real garden were vary Lilabagned
probably the whole their would melee itself into a question
of law. The anion was brought by Mr. Dye, the proprietor
of the Royal half= Opera, Cothet-ganka, and the defec-
ting, Mr. Hughes, was a otheitor at Worcester, who bad
advanced authored, sum of nee Mr. Lanky, who
had been ke with ran Meese of Leant Open, in
thensyserket.ltanceleybeenee loverione
and was end swag ellen by the Want, who,
throe judgments spine lgn name* to ahem 8,0001. •
=Taredger Ind the .0.. of Math( the body or the
gathie keen, or, tf he prelims% he nigh by digit
sink legal mannish of soy property of the nt• end pay
hinec:il4lbe rent. Mr. kind ekes cm his three
j end abided OM all Mr. Lieseley'e other
U wry to Mr. Gya to endeanur
to sheds peensaina of the ,brat, end be opined a corn-
thendthes with Mr. Hughes is February, 1863, which ended
in the apemen thou which this action is brought. It was
dean the nth March, 1866, and the defendant agreed to let
Mr. Opt the theatre (exolosin of the properties which were
inertgeged to Lad Ward) for 6,0001. a year, payable
le advisee, from the 31st of then, and to denim the
same for all the term which the &Amgen bad as
digit creditor. Mr. Gye pail the 6,0001. on the 30th darn,
taking it for granted that he should have possession. Be
want with Mr. Beck, the defendant's agent, oa the Ist Ana,
bat could not obtain possession. Mr. Oyes paid the nenraace,
3641. 10e. soon afterwards, but be never got posendoo, for a
person in Mr. Ltunley's employ wee there, and rotund to let
anybody in. The present action was therefor* brought to
recover hack the 6.0001. which Mr. Gre bad paid, and the
arrows to which he had been pet. sad he undas'ood it
would be said on the other aide that Mr. Oyes did sot want to
epee the theatre, and therefore be had lost nothing by not
being in possession. Further, that Mr. Hughes bed not
agreed to glee him possession.
The Lord Chief Justice said he Reprehended that the reel
gelation was what wee the meaning of the agreement,
whether it stipulated that the plaintiff was to have ponsegon
or not.

Mr. Gye wee examined at oonsiderable length, and eras*
other *iv he said that whin the agreement vas signed he
bed no ides that Mr. Hurtles had not the power to give
peresesice. No Intimation of that kind was ever given to
wNaess Helm the agreement was signed he pointed out to
Mr. Muslim the pecutierity of the phrase in the agree-
ment that whams was to be " authorised" to take permit*
Mr. Hughes said that meant to give authority, to give power,
end whams mid, "If that is your interpretation lam sada-
led." He believed Mr. Hughes added, " What do you pay
your belt
most
Upon that, vitamin signed the ever
taut,
meat, most ow was asinly that Mr. Hughes in pm-
mesios. Mr. explained that the eau in pommel= for
them was a man they had found M poseession of the pro-
pram, and awed that that man should hold the house for
witness, bat be said he would rather have a tom of hie own.
It was of the greatest importanoe to him to get poomedm,
and if he had thought he could not get it he should not have
paid tie mosey.
Orem examined—ln Nobiliary, 1863, he woo not aware
that the sheriff was in possession of the theatre sad proper_
tie for the debts of Mr Lumley. It was certainly a very
Important thing for hies that that theatre should not be
opened against him.
Mr. Bovill—l believe you have often expressed the opi.
nice that London could not support two Italian Operas
Witness—That depended upon how they were worked. I
7 so sow if they are in the hands of two different people.
In 1868 thme was opposition between Mr. Lumley and him.
He know by rumour that these ware judgments *mind Mr.
Lareley. As to judgment., he did not, be was happy wry,
know what a judgment was at this moment.
Mr, Bedll—And I hope you never will, until judgment it
prononseed ageism you in this ore. (Laughter.)
Whams continued—He had ascertained when he nog*.
elated for the theatre that 41 boxes and staW, amounting in
value to 12,1761. a year, had been let off, and be knew from
report that the highest rent the theatre had ever let for w
0001. a year. In 1853 he heard reports that an operatic
tempany was going to her 'Nasty's; out at that time there
imam company there every year. He *ever bought the pro-
petite of the theatre. It would have been desirable, but
net positively mammary, die him to he* bought *am if he
intended opeeing it. He never odd It via worth while to
WOW. to keep her Majesty's Theatre dosed, nor did he
any body could elk* to pay 6,0001. to have as
olden theatre closed for three or four month.. It was Mdy,
he said, that Mr. Lein* would do all he could to
keep whims out of the house ; and, therefore he asked
whether Mr. Hughes mold let Irrespeadve of Mr. Lumley ?
He reamived notice has Mr. Lumley soon after he signed the
aresteset that Mr. Hughes had no power to let the thistle,
bat be treated it as a mere threat, and paid hie mem at the
806 March.

at the coeclusion piths evidesea, addressed the
Zs%the defendant, cootending that the real object of the
le anterior; Into the agreement was not to obten
peewee= but to keep the theatre doted, and ibis view he
anbethied was suppwird by many ofrownstaeow in the
*there owe, sad would be more clearly estalthebsd by the
wridonce width be should Icy before them.
Tbe thither bearing of the rem wee adjourned.