The Sun.
London, England, 1864-10-08 00:00:00

BETTING AT MANCHESTEP-FRIDAY.

There was a gc3d mus'3r at the Rooms tbis day, but
business wr 3 not so extzr sive es it has been for some days
past, and was confined entirely 5 the Cesarew;t3b, for which
the sweat3st e•nount of support was awardc3 to Mail Train.
100 to 6 was offered on the field for the Cambridgeshire.
Closing picas :--

CESAREWITCH.
sto 1 agat Mail Train (taken)
6to agst Gratitude (wanted)
9to 1 asst Thalestlls (taken)
9to 1 agat Calista colt (offered)
100 to 6 agst Lady Hylda (taken and offered)
25 to 1 agst Cathedral (taken)
25 to 1 aget Suspicion (taken and offered)
100 to 3 agst Planet (taken)
40 to 1 agst The Brewer (Wien)
66 to 1 agst Beaver (taken)
60 to 1 agat Blackdown (taken)
1000 to 15 agst Dr Syntax (offerea)
100 to 1 apt Myrtle (token)
CAMBRIDGESHIRE.
100 to 6 on the field (offered)
25 to 1 agst Srookinger (taken)

THEATEICAL DISPUTE.

At the Liverpool County Court, on Thursday, there wes
1, befora Mr J. K. Blair, the judge, end a jury, the
action of B-anson v. Heath, which wrs brought to recover
r asscssion of the mrau-ct:pt of a drr-na, ent;tl:d "Lir:en
Trrfford," or its N.s‘llo. Mr Wilson appe:red for the plrin-
cff; Mr Cobb for the defendant.
Mr Wilson arid the ple'at'ff is this case wes Mr Wm.
Scholrißrenson, leF see rid manager of the Adelphi Theatre.
and the defendant was Mr Thr adore Heath, manager of the
Colosseum Theatre, and licensed victualler of Liverpool. It
was rn action to recover either the menusci:pt of a drama
written by end belonging to the plaintiff entitled "'Alien
Trafford," or the rum of LlO, 'he value of it. The simple
queition the jury hal to decide was, had the plaintiff
a right to the manuscript, r-id was it detailed by the
derendant? If the MS. were given up to the plaintiff the
damage sustained would, on the payment of the costs, be
r-auc dh a mete norrin^l amount. The plaintiff was for-
merly a prefessiona' actor, rid in IS6I was engaged by the
defendant to perform at his theatre. Mr Heath, knowing
that the plaintiff was an occasional composer of dramas,
d h m if, during; his en7agement, he cauld produce any
novelty. The plaintiff replied th4l he was then engaged on
a d'.ama that wou'd, ho thought, be of more than ordinary
interest. The drama being fia'shcd, it was played for 18
successive performing nights (luting the plaintiff's engage-
ment, rad it was corsidered to bs a very succ'ss.al pro-
duction. From time to time the plaintiff wanted to 1-now
what Mr Heath intended to pay him for a copy of tho piece,
and on the last night of his engagement be went to that
gentlemen and requested to receive same remuneration. Mr
Heath was at that time in the money-teVng place; he had
a great deal to do; end, after some discussion, he agreed to
g:eo Mr Branson e:‘, when the manuscript was handed
over for the pu pose ct a copy being tie:en. Mr Branson
was about to pew': id to Aberdeen a te'fil an engagement
There, and the aria -gement was that the menusc.ipt should
be left with Mr Heath to take a copy from, the original to be
returned to him. Now the ju, would have to say whether
Mr Heath merely prrchrscl a copy of the drama for £2, or
whether he gave that brm for the orig:nal manuscript. Mr
Branson had written severe]. times to Mr Heath to have the
manuscript rettn.:ed, but possibly this ac:ion would never
have been brought 1 not Mr Heath in the early par lof
the year advertised the drama as F 9 proper 4 and for sale,
when Mr L.ansan thought it necessary to vrudicate b's
tight to the troperty. It was not the question whether the
manuscript was worth £lO or 10s ; ell they Lai to say wes
—did it tight—Ply belong to the plaintiff.

In accordance with the suagez.tion made by bis Honour,
it was decided that the verdict shou'd be for the pla'utitf,
the mnusctipt should be given up, aid the damages re-
duced to a merely nom'nel a-norZt,

'The plaintiff, having coi:oborated the statement of his
advocate, said he wrote two characters
in the drama espe-
cially for himself, for he appeared in the drama t 33 the twin
brothers. (A laugh) He made a
charge of £3 for a copy
of the manuscript, but took £) Saw an advelisement in
the Era that the piece was fer 4.
sale,
was time to bring an action. Hedccan dho then
muchthought as houghttreret
guiner 3 for copies of pieces wiittenbyeitd
him
pndas t
little as
38s. In cross-examination the witness said the piece had
a sensation scene in it. Mr Heath might have registered
the drama, but it was nevertheless witness's property.
Mr Henry Feanklin, theatrical agent, provel causing the
insertion of an advertisement in the Era stating that the
pi▪
on called " Lillian Trafford" was for sale' and that the
solo property in it belonged to Mr Theodore Heath. The
pi▪
ece was mere valuable through having been performed for
three weeks, es it was stamped with popelarity,
Mr Cobb, for the defence, said that Mr Heath had in '-
chased the manuscript, and he had registered the piece and
got it licensed. Mr Brenson was in very needy circuna-
slences at the time he received the £2, and Mr Heath was
very kind to him. Were there any real grounds for the
action, it would have been brought long ago, and the plain-
tiff would not have ellowed so much time to elapse. The
piece was written for Mr Heath, and was his sole property.
It had been performed at the theatre i i Hull, end on Mr
Braaten threatening an Wien against the manager of that
establishment, Mr Heath wrote him a letter complaining of
his audacity in claiming the piece as his property after the
writer had paid for it, end trusting that he should hear no
more of his "impudent bombast."
The defendant was called, end said he asked the plaintiff
on one occasion if ho was not good at " hashing" a niece,
and if so, what would he write him one for, as witness had
a fine water scene used in the representation of the " Pirate
of Savanna," which he wished to introduce? The plaintiff
replied that he had no rehearsals, that witness had been
very kind to him, that it would be pastime to write such a
piece, and that he would make no charge. Witness told him
he could introduce a rock in the scene, make the " heavy"
man throw the leading lady from it into the water, while he
himself might, if he thought fit, jump in after her and save
her. (Laughter.) Witness named the title of the piece, end
it ran for three weeks. Mr Brenson took the sensation part,
but witness believed that he broke down. (Laughter.) Mr
Branson asked one night if £2 would be too much to give
him for the piece, and witness said " certainly not," and
hended over that amount: Mr Branson afterwards wished
witness to retueu the manuscript, and offered to give him a
sovereign if he would do so. Declined to do so, as he had
got blocks specially for the piece, and asked what did Mr
Branson want the manuscript for ? He replied that it
might be of use to him on his benefit nights, and witness
said ho might play the piece on such occasions, and he
would lend him his woodcuts.
Benjamin Stoddart and another witness named Barford
were examined, and they stated that they were playing at
Mr Heath's theat-o in 1861. They heard the plaintiff say
he was w riling a Crama for Mr Heath. Mr Stoddart and
Mr Heath also stated that the plaintiff on one occasion at
Mr Squire Greenwood's applied for permission to play
"Lillian Trefford.''
His Honour left it to the jury to say whether there had
been an absolute transfer of the property to the defendant,
or whether the £2 was given merely for a copy.
The j ury, after a few minutes' consultation, gave a verdict
for the plaintiff for £lO, that sum to.be reduced to is on the
manuscript being given up. The costs of witnesses were
allowed.

The Gazette de France announces that the Duke
de la Rochefoucald-Dondeauville died tho day before yes-
terday at his Chateau of Armainvilliers, in his 79th year,