The Express.
London, England, 1868-02-06 00:00:00

Isla fidelity:to.

BAIL COURT.—Fan. 5.
After Term Nisi Pries Sittings at Weetminebse.--(Befon
Mr. Justice Shee and a Common Jury.)
ailmexr V. WEBSTER.
This was en action by Mr. Dominick Murray, the well-
known comedian, against Mr. Benjamin Webster, for an
alleged breach of agreement relative to his taking • half
benefit at the Olympic Theatre.
Mr. Hoddleston, Q.C., and Mr. F. H. Lewis were coca-
Del for the plaintiff. Mr. Serjeent Ballantine and lie.
Wood appeared for the defendant.
The action was brought by the plaintiff against the
defendant upon • contract which was entered into
between them, and it appeared that in 1866 the
plaintiff was engaged at the Olympic Theatre, then
under the management of Mr. Horace Wigan, to play first
low comedian and Irish parts, at • salary of 8/. Per week
and a clear half benefit. In December, 1866, the defendant
became the lessee of the Olympic, when the plaintiff
metered into a similar eagegement with him, with
the exception that the salary was reduced to 71.,rM
week. The engagement was for the sawn, •1e
which depended upon the manager sad the snows of a
piece ; and it was generally terminated by • notice being
put up by the manager in the green-room. Matters went
on very well until the end of June or the
beginning of July, when the plaintiff spoke to Mr. Sin-
lock, the treasurer and acting manager, and asked hilt
when he wan to take his benefit, and that be should like
to play an Irish character in • drama that he had per-
formed in before, and which had been very neonatal.
Mr. Kinlock suggested his applying to the defendant, and
be accordingly wrote to the defendant to fix his benefit,
for permission to play the piece, and to know if his ser-
vices would be required the ensuing season. That letter
was accordingly sent to the defendant, and received by
him, but overlooked or forgotten. No answer was sent to
it ; but afterwards the defendant admitted that he had
received the letter, and it had escaped his memory. The
plaintiff receiving no answer made an engagement for the
ensuing season to perform at the New Queen's Theatre,
and it was insinuated on behalf of the plaintiff that this
annoyed the defendant, and had caused him to act in the
manner complained of towards the plaintiff. On the 3rd
of August there was posted up in the green-room • notice
to the following effect:—" Those ladies and gentlemen who
aredesirous of renewing their engagements for the ensuing
season are requested to make their application in
writing to Mr. Kinlock on or before Saturday,
the 10th instant"—an intimation that the season
was drawing to a close, and as, by the rules of the
theatre, three weeks' notice was required to be given to
the manager before • benefit could come off, the plaintiff
considered be was entitled to • similar notice, and that he
should not be allowed sufficient time in which to make
his arrangements, and he accordingly spoke again to Mr.
Hi lack and Mr. H. Wigan, and again pressed them to
tjx the time for his benefit. He afterwards saw the defen-
dant, and spoke to him about it. Defendant replied that
he Wes not aware that the plaintiff was entitled to • half
clear benefit, upon which plaintiff referred him to the
terms of the agreement. Defendant then complained that
be thought the plaintiff had not acted fairly or courteously
towards him, in not giving him the refusal of his services
when the mistake with reference to the letter was ex-
'Mined. On the following day he asked the defendant if
be was to take the green-room notice as a notice of the
clove of the season, to which defendant replied that it
would depend upon the success of the piece ( The Grass-
hoper ) that was to be produced that evening. Plaintiff
asked defendant if he had any objection to the drama he
bait forwarded to him being performed, and be replied that
plaintiff must arrange with the manager. He pressed the
manager to fix a time, but he said he could not without
Webster's consent. No benefit was offered, and no day
Axel. The Tres Paddifoota was cast, and the character of
Beale was cast to him ; but he refused, on the ground that
it was not first comedy. Mr. Wigan said he was much
annoyed with plaintiff for so doing, and in reference to the
benefit, all Mr. Wigan said was, "As you will not play
Bottles, I shall fine you a week's salary, and not allow
nu to make any change in the prograunne." Five benefits
bad taken place prior to this date, anal the actors and
actresses bad the inearinhle privilege cf changing the pro-
gramme, end ',electing their pieces, subject to the approval
of the manager. Plaintiff estimated a clear half benefit
to be worth between 60/. and NC at the Olympic. The
I'm, Peddifie't was reed at the theatre on the l'ith
of August. The part of Duffles wax not a first comedy
part, but decidedly a farce old man. He considered the
part of Puddifoot, jun., the first low comedy part. That
character we.. eaeigned to Mr. Horace Wigan. The faros
lied bees cast three times at the Adeiphi, and Ruffles had
been cast for Mr. Stephenson. Mr. John Clarke read the
farce, and considered Pullalifoot, jun., was his part. After
reading the part plaintiff retired from the green-room,
nun left the theatre. He made no complaint, because he
Iced ;in idea that the piece, although cast, would not be
played.
The learned judge deferred his summing up until to-day
(Thursday). _

COURT OF DIVORCE.—FEa. 5.
(Before Sir J. P. Wilde.)
NEI THORPY. r. Nrt.THORM.

Dr. Swahey for the petitioner, and Mr. Searle for the
respondent.
This was the husband's petition for a dimolution of
marriage on the ground of his wife's adultery with
several men unknown. The petitioner is a banker s clerk
and married the ropoudent m les;:.. at St. Mary's, Lam-
beth. They only lived together for three months and their
married life v.,. eo unhappy that they agreed to separate,
the husband covenanting to allow his wife 100 f. a year.
Mrs. Nelthorpe then went to reside at Clapham, and
subsequently in Pimlico, and at both these places evidence
was milled to prove that she had been in the habit of
receiving vieits from gentlenwn.
Ilie lonlehip am satisfied, and a decree nisi was
pronounced.

CILMAN r. “11.51.01 AND %%EMI.

Dr. Tristram for the petitioner, who sued for a diao•
lotion of marriage on the ground of his wife's adultery
with the ca. n•spornleitt. The co-respondent admitted the
adultery, but said he did not know the respondent was a
n.arrisol woman at the that.. The petitioner is the son of
a merchant in the City, and married the respondent in
I d 4. at St. Mary's, L utilieth. The wife had presiously
been leadinz a " gay life." After the marriage she
became addicted ti excessive drinking, and ultimately
left her linsb.ind to icturn to the life which she bad
previously
Decree nisi.

MIDDLESEX SESSION&

(Before Mr. l'a) Deputy-AssiAtant-Jud4e.)

Fe e& rid J"nta., u, 1..., a ~aishrt-looking young nun, was
lot entering the honee of niton Stirlocki, No. '2.3,
Savile-row. and atealii..; a pencil caav, a timepiece, and
other articles, value -no., the property of the said Paul
Stizlecki. _ _

From the evidence of the valet, Henry Stokes, it ap-
peared that about nine o'clock on the :3rd January he
was oaring downstairs, when he met the prisoner, and
seized him. A desperate struggle ensued, and the& got
into the street. a here sonic of the prisoner's companies'
tripped him up. and the prisoner got out of his grasp. The
witness got up. and followed the prisoner, crying out
" Stop thief." He was stopped and secured. The articles
named in the indictment were taken from the prisoner,
and were worth 401.

Ths prisoner pleaded guilty.
Sergeant Cole, C divudon, proved 12 months' imprison-
ment against the prisoner iu ; and said that since he
bad been out he had been the constant companion of
thieves. He had cautions I him as to his fate, and told
him if he wanted a shilling at any time he (the sergeant)
would give it to him.
The Assistant-Judge said Sergeant Cole had acted very
kindly to the priaoner, and bad given him good advice, to
which he had paid no attention. The sentence was AT.CII
years' penal servitude.