Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-02-15 00:00:00

HER MAJESTY'S THEATRE.

ACTION BY LORD WARD AGAINST MR.
This case was tried before the Lord Chief Baron
and a special jury at Guildhall, on Monday.
Mr. Bovill, Q.C., and Mr. Mellish appeared for
the plaintiff; Mr. Edwin Jaws, Q.C.,. Mr. Haw-
kins, Q.C., and Mr. Maude for the defendant.
This was an action of debt for rent. The main
plea was one of accord and satisfaction by giving
up possession of the Opera-house and cancelling
the lease. The defendant was lessee of the Opera-
house. The speculation was not successful, and
the plaintiff had in various ways assisted'the defen-
dant to keep the house open. In 1856 the debt had so
increased that it became necessary to make some
arrangements. The lease was then assigned
to the plaintiff. This lease had about 36 years •
to run, and was subject. to a ground rent of £l9OO.
The plaintiff then leased the Opera-house to the
defendant at a rent of £0,275 per annum. This
rent was paid till Michaelmas 1857. After this
no rent was paid. On the 10th of August, 1858,
possession was given up, and the lease cancelled.
The action was brought to recover £4,560 for this
rent. Defendant set up that it was agreed that
if the lease was given up this rent need not be
paid.
John Henry Benbow, the plaintiff's solicitor,
having been examined by Mr. Mellish, said, in
cross-examination by Mr. James, Lord Ward had
been connected some years 'with the Opera. He
had advanced sums of money to release the honse
from liabilities. The lease was assigned to ,Lord
Ward. There was due 'to his lordship Z 38,600 at
the time of assignment. The ground rent was
£1,900; the house was let at £6 275. The lease
had thirty-six years to run. The case of "-Crofts
and Lumley" was then pending. It raised the
question as to whether the lease was forfeited to
the ground landlord. It was decided in April,
1858, in the House of Lords. I always told
the defendant he must pay rent and give up
.possession. I did not tell him if he would give'
up possesoion quietly I would not ask him for
rent.. Possession was given up on the 10th of
August. I told Lumley he must give a warrant
of attorney ; he objected on the ground that giving
a judgment must be very pfejudicial to him. I
proposed that he should give an undertaking to
gise a judgment. He refused. It was not on the
ground that it had been agreed that if he
gave up possession Lord Ward would not ask for
rent. Lord Ward desired me to insist upon the
payment of the rent. Lord Ward has possession
of the theatre.

Re-examined.—Lord Ward has paid nearly
£lOO,OOO on the part of the theatre. His lord-
ship had bought the properties for £10,500 before
the assignment. The suit for ejectment was
pending at the time of the assignment, so that if
it had been decided agairtht Lumley the assign-
ment to Lord Ward would have been valueless.
Lord Ward, examined by Mr. Bovill—My first
transaction with Lumley was the purchase of
opera-boxes when he became lessee. The theatre
'was closed some three or four years before 1856.
I interested myself to get the theatre open.
Lumley could not open it on account of liabilities.
I assisted him to pay off these liabilit;es. I have
advanced in all from £90,000 to £lOO,OOO. For
that I have the assignment of the lease. I
remember the meeting of the 25th of June, 1857.
Lumley was anxious about the appeal, and wished
the terms of his lease altered. It- was promised
that if Croft's case was settled in Lumley's favour
I would reduce the rent from five per cent. to four
per cent.
By the Chief-Baron—I never in any shape or.
way agreed to give up back rent if Lumley would
give up possession.

Mr.Jam' es having addressed the jury for the
defendant,

Mr. Lumley was examined by Mr. Hawkins—
I have been connected with the opera since 1842.
My connection with Lord Ward commenced in
1844. The action of " Croft v. Lumley " com-
menced in 1853. Lord Ward had purchased
judgments against the theatre. In March, 1856,
I made an assignment of the lease to Lord Ward.
I valued it at £150,000. Previously Lord Ward
had offered me £lO,OOO if I would assign it
absolutely to him. In 1857 I asked his lordship
to forego two years' rent. He consented to forego
one year's rent. In July, 1857, his lordship stated

f

- 3

that if the decision in the House of Lords was
favourable he would reduce the rent from 5 to, 4
per cent., and that one years' rent should be
foregone, and spread over the remainder of the
term. The decision in the House of Lords was
given in April, 1858, in my favour. In May,
1858, I had an interview with Benbow. I said,
" If Lord Ward will carry out the plan mentioned
for forming a company, I could get the money."
He said, "f you will give up possession quietly,
I will give up the rent." On the 7th of. June,
1858, I executed a transfer of the properties to
his lordship. A writ was issued on the 19th of
June. few days afterwards I had an interview
at Dudley-house. I gave a pledge to give' up
possession immediately after termination of the
season. Afterwards I told Benbow that he had.
promised to forego the rent if I would quietly
give up possession. He assented. In October I
saw leis lordship at Paris. No demand was made.
I said, " Your lordship always promised me a.
year's rent." He said, " You have got it."
Cross-examined by Mr. Bovill—l do not know
that the lease has been valued at £50,000. The
properties of the theatre were put up to auction
in 1853. Lord Ward bought them for £lO,OOO.
I used them, and. as they wore out I replaced
them. During the proceedings in the House of
Lords the ground rent was in arrear. I received
all the receipts or the theatre in 1858, and I
neither paid ground rent nor Lord Ward's rent.
Charles Lee, examined by Mr. Bovill—l valued
the theatre at £50,000.
Cross-examined—We have asked £7,000 a-year
of Mr. Smith.. I have received an offer of £7,000,
but no security was offered, and I refused. -
The Chief Baron having summed up,
The jury almost immediately found a verdict
for the plaintiff—Damages, £4,560.

THE WAKEFIELD PETITION.

SCENE IN THE TOWN COUNCIL.
On Monday a speciatmeeting of the Wakefield Town
Council was held, for the purpose of taking into con-
sideration the desirability of' petitioning Parliament to
make Wakefield a warehousing place. The Mayor (Mr.
11. Brown,. solicitor) occupied the chair; and, having
mentioned the subject for which the meeting was called,
said that Colonel Sthyth, M.P. for York. hid under-
taken-to. present a. petition on behalf of Wakefield.:-.-
Councillor Lamb here rose,- and said that no one
in that meeting felt a greater interest in the question
than he ; but he could not, at the same time, help
feeling that the town stood in a very peculiar and
anomalous position. (" Hear, hear," and " Order.")
Unfortunately, they had no member of their own ;
and, under those circumstances, he felt that it would
be utterly impossible for them to get a favourable hear-
ing from any member of the Government, from the fact
that there was a strong feeling against them in the whole
House of Commons. (" Order, order," and uproar.)
He thought that that party who had been the means of
introducing a petition against the return of Mr. Leatham
had inflicted an injury on the borough from which it
would not soon recover. (Hear, hear, and "Order.")
And this became the more offensive when he took into
consideration the fact that a great number of those
who took the most- piominent part in the petition
were the very men who were steeped up to the necks
in bribery. (Here some half dozen of the members
got
etbi pt, a
di
ornwd.:;7pillevdaliliv
appealing
stiol e gesticulatedntchec wasitr a"yOroerrsdtteoorr, o e
(pi
,ruttl3ecir,ro':u
Councillor
th
e
f Inii
04r
proceeded.) It appeared to him that the proceedings of
the Tories in connection with the petition was one of
the most monstrous specimens of hypocrisy that had,
ever occurred in the annals of party warfare; for it
was well known to the world that it was by the means
of bribery alone that a Tory member had ever sat
for Wakefield. (Loud cries of " Order," and
" Chair.") They, and they alone, had been the
primary means of placinr, the borough in its present
disgraceful position ; and it was through them, and
them alone, that Bradford or some similar town
would be placed in the schedule instead of Wakefield.
—Councillor Sanderson was very sorry that Councillor
Lamb had indulged, in such observations.—Alderman
Haigh thought Councillor Lamb quite right in
bringing the matter forward. There was no doubt
that the party who had brought the petition against Mr.
Leatham had
,been guilty of one of the most atrocious
pieces of hypocrisy that he had ever heard of in his
life.—(Cries of " Order," and great confusion.)—The
Mayor : If these observations are to be indulged in,
I will leave the chair.—Alderman Haigh : You may
do as you please ; but of this I am satisfied, that
if you and other members of this Council had not inter-
fered as regards that petition, we should now have been
in a-position to enforce our claims before Parliament.—
Alderman Green : If Mr. Lamb feels himself guilty,
why should I be punished for it?—Councillor Lamb:
You may plead not guilty, Mr.. Green; but your son was
one of the petitioners, and lie was proved to, have been
guilty of bribery in three or four cases.—A scene of con-
siderable confusion followed; but ultimately the petition,
to Parliament was adopted.

THE STRENGTH OF IRON SHIPS.
One of the largest and most influential meetings ever
held at the Royal Institution, took place on Monday
evening in the large Lecture-hall of that building, the
object being to hear a lecture on the strength of iron_
ships, by Win. Fairbairn, .Esq., C.E. The hall was
crowded. The audience comprised a large number of
shipbuilders, merchants, and shipowners, besides others
less interested in the subject. The chair was occupied
by Mr. Maxwell Scott ; and Mr. Wm. Brown and Mr.
James Holme were also upon the platform.
Mr. FAIRI3AIRN having licen introduced by the
chairman, Said that the subject of iron ship-building
was of deep importance to a large mercantile com-
munity like this; and having become convinced, after a
long series of experiments, that there were many defects
in the principles adopted in the construction of iron
ships, his object was to lay before that meeting his views.
The great principle which he laid down for constructing
an iron vessel was, the : acquirenient of the
same area at the top as at the bottom ; and ships
should be so constructed that the greatest strength 'of
material should be in the centre, and that the deck
should be as strong as the keel. In the pi esent state of
our knowledge we were greatly deficient in our princi-
ples of construction. The strength of the stringers
might be gradually reduced towards the centre; and he•
wished it to be borne in mind, that the greatest
strength of material was requisite in the centre, and that
if the material in the centre was double the strength of
that at the extremities, they would obtain greater strength,
while only the same amount of material was required.
lie urged that a ship ought to be constructed according
to the laws of nature, and when shipbuilders departed
from such laws they were sure to go wrong. He recom-
mended the adoption of longitudinal stringers and the
cellular system—the plan adopted in the construction of
the Great Eastern. He had frequently visited that ves-
sel during the time when she was being built, and hav-
ing also seen the plans, •he was convinced she was the
strongest ship afloat in proportion to her size. To ob-
tain a sufficient amount of resistance for the deck, he
recommended that a hollow longitudinal cell should b.
placed on each side of the hatches, and another tria*-
gular cell on each side of the vessel immediately beneath
the bulwarks. These would require to be supported ;
and he proposed that they should be rivettcd to the
bulkhead: They' had all heard what iron plates were,
and he earnestly urged the shipbuilders not to spare a
little expense to get good material: he had had ina-
terial'in his place which was little better than
0,.
pipe-
clay. ' He merely said this to show that a great deal
. into
bad material was manufactured ; and when it got
Themo
a vessel all rules of construction were useless.
at
e sfs ewesn, y which do
greatest care should be exercised in the choice, of int et-
aailr,tyanshdilliitngsshaoutoldn
w•boeulc.darmefauklelyalltetshteed. difference,
an
united, was the best
stronaer ; and when properly .
ma-
terialcwhich could be used for the
tpurpose he was de-
scribing.
adoptingall in-
finitelybetterla tlets onlshouldyremained
an b edouble
wood,bfor
i wrought.
nls
ixo
tuo
urge upon
ptwoans timesth e
smheipanbsuitloderimtphreovaebtshoelutsetren
advantages
to h this country, and
which would still tend to secur
had gained so many
her supremacy on
the seas. The lecturer, repeatedly throughout, warmly
applauded.
at the close of his address, was warmly
applauded.
to Mr.
A vote of thanks • Fairbairn, moved by Mr.
Alderman Bennett, was carried ky acclamation, and lie
was elected an honorary member of the Polytechnic
AS oschieotryt,
discussion
wiohnoseenasuasepdi,caltehr the
Nlvehluhrethweasprdoecleiev:lirnegds.
terminated. gth t 1