The Express.
London, England, 1857-08-17 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, MONDAY EVENING, AUGUST 17, 1857.

Eat° Intdlignite.

MSTIOPOLITAI 60011SY 001:12T2.
llKlima appoleeed fa We must IraL
SLOOXISCIT. Partbadeced.-11edma0L7, Asemi, to; Tbsoday, 2),
1204 y,
Laisurra, Cautirwl War-2421. Tnierby, Mont IS: Weds*.
ll; Tlrnias
♦ratwoan, +wl►+Ml—tlmad•7, *aged*: Mow U.

newspaper, sad alio the advertisement :elating to "Les
Peewees de Perla." He believed that every one al the
actors had b mild at the war.

—The Chief Dire;;;lllThey raft ceold mot p tato tlde
heard matter. They bad aol is de with whet the odors bed
ones&

The wftwees Urn hart ebbed tint in meneepesse of
the Betio he wee plevented k. sibs the right et mar
=settllione beenellenteasentrymeeigeswhire wee a
estwee eff melbas angleag et asseseenfalplesu
Crenwesemined by Mr. Jentes—l am( am ester. Ido whet
is caked die heavy kart beim A Isegb.) I played
Mr. Ralph Vaunt In ray ewe plea. Tbw• wee a very poill
house on the fhb peellaratenos. Did not know that Mr.
Laurence Levi had anything to do with the theatre. I only
know Mr. Payne as the wareager. The piece was played fee
about three we at the likand Therm It eltavemb wee
played at the Victoria. The easseger et that beaks gave
us 2L hr penebeien e=tlaregh.) This
not
skew it MI boa The piece wee not
dimmer Air PitZ bees pia= the =me number
at night at the Ifieteels. It was as emimeful aa such
reasiperrellyzir. Thectiem witateAlevient=ted, and he
him
two lege te write.
Mr. Jeers ben aid it ap to Yes bet thin Maim
pat en aid to the can, ihr y the Ilk wan el
that act it was specialldired that en anther sr ether
we should not-be enli to my tend& bees lb
crises on certain conditime, ewe et whisk wee, the work
theta be dab regibiwar we.
at aujarNvith'
The cresewammirdien be however, wee con-
tinued. He mid—l de net eerier q plea a tennelation
from the lbw& I beds weed ides ad ailed arm that,
assel I tomidee des plies gigot et the libend Menke to be
weeblee —. I litiewi a trarlation ettbereineit piece
reed he no by Mr. Payne, but I awed I never saw the
deknebste week hebee I wrote my owe. The toe end
Those
ehnnekes in ear pine aro Anna heather in the Frease.
wee a seleating by einreemi erne, a phad sem% sad
a gagger menu ends &ebb some ea the log
e& the Preach
pine, end then ene in core, but the lam-ideate are differently
menemell.
Mr. Jams—The lest act ends, I believe, by eau of the
chambers, Revesebee, bein handcuffed by the police 6 the
drop 616, and than thwe ii a tableatm—that do:su mia not
in the Preach origiewl.
Witnew—Certainly eat. (A laugh.)
Mr. imam—And at the coselusien of your piece, Martha,
another of the characters, admen the audience, and saws,
" May we, with your printed" cry WI right, and reckon
on a repeat to-morrow night t" (Much las&taa.) That is,
of mune also " original."
Witless—That we. not In the French piece. He went
on to lay that the title of Mr. Reades piece was " Poverty
and Pride," end Mr. Payne gave their piece the title of
The Pride of Poverty, or, the Real Poor of London."
Cram-examination—Poisoning by charcoal was a very
memos
Strand Theatre iecidesit We play, mot only in France, but at the
Isesee—l believe mother " inrident " In your play
is where Rastenathie atolls a table cloth la the hole in the
pertltthe to harp the draught out, sad at the some time
says that then to enough wind to blow a mail teeth down
' him throat. (Lawhter.) That I rumen is another ori-
glual portion, and was not in the French piece.
Witmer—lt is not is the Preach piece.
In sesame to further questions ppast by Mr. Jame*, the
witness said that ore or two of the Iseidrb in his play were
similar to those in the French, but he camidered the general
character of the piece was so altered that it might fairly be
considered an original production.
Mr. Jaynes--I see that while the charcoal 'Bair is going on
as one aide, Itavenstose, who is or the other—the wage
being divided and forming two 11016•11—WOLO• to he more
mesible, for he says he shall have his supper, and prooeeds to
eat four emcee of belled beef. (A laugh.)
Mr. Chambers—There is no" Width" introduced la the
original piece. (laughter.)
The witness these said that there was a fraudulent beaker
in his piece, and se there woo in the French.
Mr. James—The only difference being that fa your piece
hula a "British Bank "-er. (Laughter.)
'Witness—Exactly so. (Renewed laughter.)
Mr. B. Barnett deposed that he was the joint author of
the isiees in question with Mr. Johnetone. He understood
the French language perfectly, and his attention wee attracted
to the French piece Lea leaver, de Jane, and be got a obey
of it and read it carefully through, and afterwards read a
rough 'emulation to Mr. I nyne, and he said that it waa too
bag, and ammeted that witness and Mr. Johnstone should
write a Moller drama, and upon this; they wrote the one in
question. They only adopted the main incidents of the
French piece, and introduced altogether new characters. The
comic character of their piece was a man who sold bouth in a
barrow. (A lamb.) In the French pine • sign painter was
the comic peeeonage. He said the idea was taken from the
French piece,aa but he considered that their own pine, not-
withstandilw quite original.
The Cl,' Baron, at the conclueion of Mr. Borneo's evi-
dence, said really thought it was quite mama to go into
any more evidence. The only questom was whether the
plaintiff's piece was a pirated imitation of the other, and this
could be much more eerily ascertained by reading over the
original FrenA pleat end the two others.
Mr. James mid he should submit that the plaintiff, lied
nude out no ease at all, and that ea they had not compiled
with the provisions of the Copyright Act, they had no pm-
perty.whatever in the piece in question, and bad no ground
uof armg. The question wan ors of considerable itnpnlaue
undoubtedly, both to English and to foreign autbhoore, and
the defendant, as the authorised agent of the latter, and,
who in that capariry had_ duty registered hie work, wag very
&shims that tithe, point should be settled.
The Chief Baron rid he was certainly of opinion that if
plaintiffs had not registered their work, they had no .legal
property in it, and had no ground for sustaining the present
action.

-14 r. Cliaroberssaid thst this was • question of law, which
he should wish to havo

The horned counsel on both side then conferred together,
and the result was that no arrangement wan come to that the
plaintiff.; should he non-suited, but with the underwending
that all the tact. and the question of law should undergo
further consideration, and if the result should be in favour of
the plaintiffs, the non-suit le to be set aside, and the court
walla, empowered to meow the damage sustained by them.