The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-05 00:00:00

said it was a seat in a private box. I did not see
the plan produced, or any plan whatever. Ido not
know whether the ticket would have admitted me
to any part of the house. I found it was not for a
seat in a private box, and so I went away. I gave
the defendant into custody that night, but the in-
spector at the station-house refused to take the
charge.
Mr. Pater—Why did you allow so long a delay
before taking out the summons?
Sir Edmund Lechmere—Delay. I took out the
summons the next morning. I was quite sober. I
must appeal to the magistrate whether such a ques-
tion ought to be put to me.
Mr. Corrie—l think you may as well answer the
question even if you think it improper. I do not
say that it is.
Mr. Pater—You can't say so, sir.
Sir Edmund Lechmere—l could bring witnesses
to character, if need be.
Mr. Pater—My client is not a baronet, but he is
a respectable man.
In further cross-examination, Sir E. Lechmere
said that he had not had any conversation on the
subject with Mr. Smith. The only person with
whom he bad talked it over was another gentleman
who had been in the same plight as himself.
Mr. Edward Tyrrell Smith, lessee of the Theatre
Royal, Drury-lane—There is no such private box
as No. 20. The ticket produced is not for a seat
in a private box, but for two seats in box No. 20,
first circle. It is not the dress circle, but a
tier above the dress circle. That is a
a public box. It is an inferior part of the house to
the dress circle. The admission to the first circle
is 3s. The plan now produced (on the part of de-
fendant) does not represent the theatre as at pre-
sent managed. It is a very old plan. Sir E. Lech-
mere might have gone into the first circle if he
pleased, with that ticket. Tickets might have been
obtained at the house on that evening. There was
plenty of room that night. Persons might have
gained admission to the first circle by paying at
the door.
Mr. Pater—ls it a common thing for tickets to
be bought and resold in this manner?
Mr. Smith—Yes, in the ordinary way ; but not
by fraud.
Mr. Pater—Don't say fraud.
Mr. Smith—l do say fraud. They write up
" Drury-lane Ticket Office," and commit a gross
robbery on the public.
Mr. Pater—And upon you, I suppose.
Mr. Smith—Not at all. It makes no difference
me, once the tickets have been sold. I take the
matter up for the sake of the public, that they may
be protected from imposition. These tickets are
sold at the box-office for 3s. each.
Mr. Pater—And ls. for booking ?
Mr. Smith—One shilling for booking, sir. Mr.
Mitchell, Mr. Sams, and other West-end book-
sellers do not buy tickets in this manner. They
subscribe for the season in the regular and legiti-
mate manner. They sell these admissions, but not
in the way it has been done in this case.
Mr. Pater—Answer my question.
Mr. Smith—l have answered you.
Mr. Pater—You are answering me in a shuffling
manner.
Mr. Corrie—That is not a proper observation.
There is nothing shuffling in Mr. Smith's manner.
Cross-examination continued—The private boxes
vary from £1 ls. to £1 1 ls. 6d. There are four
seats in the guinea boxes. From ss. to 6s. is what
a seat in a private box is worth.
Mr. Pater thought this would become a question
of weight of testimony. There was a person pre-
sent at the interview when the ticket was pur-
chased, who would swear that nothing was said
about a private box. That person was not in so
high a position as the complainant. We do not
often find a baronet—
Mr. Corrie—And if it was a question of conflict-
ing testimony he could not decide it, but would
leave it to a jury to decide which they believed.
Mr. Pater then contended at some length that
there was no case on the evidence for the prosecu-
tion, but
Mr. Corrie held that there was, and committed
the defendant for trial, admitting him to bail in
wo sureties of £2O each.