The Sun.
London, England, 1862-11-29 00:00:00

ILLINOIS CENTRAL.

It appears the London agents of this company have re-
ceived information from the treasurer in New York that
the accounts from Chicago continue favourable for the
traffic of the road, and that Mr. Osborn entertains the ex-
pectation that the Board will be able to make a 2 per cent.
dividend about the close of the present year on the scrip
stock, and hopes for a continuance thereof.

LATV IN7ELLIGENCE, Nov, 28.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

Sittings at Nisi Prius at Westminster.—(Before
Mr. Baran Martin and a Common Jury.)

MORTON AND ANOTHER V. ELLISON.-THE OXFORD
MUSIC HALL.-BREACH OF ENGAGEMENT BY A

VOCALIST.

This was an action to recover £55 in penalties
for breach of an agreement entered into between
the plaintiffs (Messrs. Morton and Stanley) and
Miss Maria L. Ellison, on the 23d of March, 1861,
whereby the latter agreed to sing at the Oxford and
Canterbury Music Halls every night, except on
Sundays and certain holidays, for 12 months, at a
salary of £6 per week. The alleged breach was that
she refused to sing on 11 nights in December, 1861,
by which she had rendered herself liable to so many
penalties of £5 each.
The defendant pleaded a number of pleas, the
principal of which were that she was compelled to
be absent owing to ill-health, and loss of her voice
in consequence of being required to sing at unrea-
sonable times and to an unlimited extent. She
also claimed as set off to the amount of £l5.

Mr. Overend, Q.C., and Mr. Tindal Atkinson
were counsel for the plaintiffs ; and Mr. Huddleston,
Q.C., and Mr. Qaain for the defendant.
Mr. Tindal Atkinson, in opening the case, said
the plaintiffs were the proprietors of the Oxford
and Canterbury Music Halls, and the defendant
was a young lady who had been engaged to sing at
those establishments nightly, at a salary of £6 a
week. Broughams were provided by the proprie-
tors, to convey the artistes from one hall to the
other. The engagement with the defendant was
entered into in March, 186 L and she soon became a
general favourite of the public, and was very suc-
cessful. Finding she had made a " hit" she began
to show dissatisfaction, complained of the salary
being too small, and that unsuitable pieces had been
selected for her. She absented herself from rehear-
sals, and then performances, and showed a good deal
of temper, which was not agreeable to the plaintiffs.
This conduct greatly interfered with the arrange-
ments for the performances, but was continued until
June 12, when she wrote a letter to the plaintiffs,
saying she wished to be excused two nights a week
without loss of salary, or to remain at the Oxford
entirely, adding " the going to and from the Ox-
ford and Canterbury every night is what I cannot
and will not do. I would rather give it up alto-
gether than be subject to such slavery." The
learned counsel then detailed the other circum-
stances which led to the plaintiffs bringing this
action, and called the following witnesses.
Mr, Fred. Stanley, one of the plaintiffs, said they
had nearly 100 performers, and that the engage-
ment of the defendant commenced with the open-
ing of the Oxford. She first stayed away from re-
hearsals and then objected to sing in the choruses.
Many times the performances were delayed by her
refusing to go on the stage. Sometimes she ob-
jected to sing because she had got a cold, and at
others said she would not go from the one place to
the other. She would speak to him in a violent
manner fox 20 minutes together without the least
chance of his saying a single word in reply.
(Laughter.) He then declined to accede to the
terms of her letter. She then complained of not
being paid as much as Miss Russell, another voca-
list, and the prima donna, who was in receipt of a
much larger sum. She said money went a long way,
and that if she got as much as Miss Russell she
would do as much as was required of her. She
went in July to the seaside on the ground of her
voice being affected, She refused to take her salary
minus the deductions for the nights she was ab-
sent. He thought there was nothing the matter
with her voice. He considered it in its prime - and
he denied that she had any ground for complaint
in having too much singing imposed upon her.
Cross-examined—Smoking and drinking went on

during the performances. There was a good deal of
smoke from the smoking, but not a great deal of
noise from the drinking. (Laughter.) The place
was well ventilated, and the smoke readily escaped.
One night the defendant would not go home, and
remained at the Oxford all night. Mr. Weston, of
the Holborn Music Hall, wished to enter into an
engagement with the defendant to sing there;
but Mr. Morton objected, and said if it were en-
tered into he would move for an injunction. She
never sent to him or Mr. Morton medical certifi-
cates, or complained of the night air. Four
broughams with warm rugs were provided for the
ladies in going from one hall to the other.
Mr. Baron Martin—Are the broughams com-
monly confined to the ladies ? (Laughter.)
Mr. Stanley-0 yes, and we only put four in a
brougham.
Mr. Morton deposed that he never saw any ap-
pearance of illness in the defendant. She sang the
night she complained as well as ever, and with the
same applause.
Cross-examined—She afterwards complained of a
sore throat, and I gave her claret and Cayenne pep-
per. (Laughter.) That is a very good remedy.
Once the defendant refused to leave the Oxford un-
less she were paid her salary without deduction,
and she remained there all night, and until 10 in
the morning.
Mr. Baron Martin—l suppose she walked about
all night ?
Mr. Overend—Yes, with the watchman, I believe.
(Laughter.)
Mr. Morton—The defendant was to forfeit £5
per night if absent without permission.
M. F. Jonghmans, the musical conductor, said he
made the engagement with the defendant. She
came with her music master, and of course sang her
best. Afterwards she did not sing well at all. One
night she objected to go on the stage because she
had a bad throat, but he gave her some claret and
cayenne, and he never heard her sing better.
(Laughter.) On another occasion she declined to go
irom the Canterbury to the Oxford. She talked and
talked, and he allowed her to go on because if he
interposed she talked the more. (Laughter.) She
was a terrible temper. (Loud laughter.)
Cross-examined—There was a good deal of trouble
in managing the ladies. It was the only trouble he
had. (Laughter.)
Mr. Quain—That is the only trouble of your life ?
Witness—ln business hours. (Laughter.)
Mr. Quain—You go, I believe, every night from
one hall to the other with the ladies ?
Witness—Oh yes. (Laughter.)
Evidence was then given to show that £lO was
once deducted from the defendant's salary for 10
1 nights' absence.
Miss S. Metz, a vocalist at, the Oxford, said the
1 defendant often told her she would not sing if she
did not get the whole of her salary. She often said
she ought to be paid as much as Miss Russell. She
was a very violent temper.
Other witnesses havit,g been called in support of
the plaintiff's case,
Mr. Qu ain then addressed the jury for the defence.
He contended that the absence of the defendant from
the Oxford and Canterbury Halls on the nights in
question was owing entirely to ill health at loss of
her voice, brought on by the hard work which she
en d
commentede
defendant, t a m more r e engagementonlutchraethivaerdn
had to undergo, and not from any desire to evade
the
e thelsewa
agreementagreement
et
onititheae es o f
got £1 a night had to who though she only
Pay a penalty of £5 for every
night's absence, and said that the object of the
action was to compel her to resume an engagement
which she was incapable of fulfilling witti.due re-
gard to her health and voice.
Miss Maria Lueza Ellison, the defendant, was
then examined. She said—l am the daughter of a
Sheffield diemaker. For two years I received les-
sons from Signor Crevilli at the Royal Academy.
Afterwards, in 1857, 1 had my first engagement.
Previously I had sung at several concerts
.ff was
in the
country. The engagement with the plaintiff
evade for me by Mr. Bodda. Mr. Stanley gave me
signed it in ignorance, believing that was my
the agreement three days before I siglned it. 1
teacher's property. The first time I appeared at
the Oxford I sang a selection from Dinorah, which
I had never seen before. It is very heavy. I also
sang a selection from Norma at the Canterbury. I
complained of having to sing these as well as songs
and duets in one evening. One night I sang as
that purpose
Ranted many as seven songs. Afterwards I fell ill, and
anted to go to the seaside. I left for
in July. Previously Mr. Morton said if I did not
sing at both places I should have nothing. I re-
turned from the seaside in August and resumed my
duty, and continued to sing as they desired me.
, The first time I sang the " Circassian" after five