The Sun.
London, England, 1854-09-02 00:00:00

THE CASE OF MADAME CARADORI.

At the Bow-street police court, yesterday, Mr. Ben-
jamin Sloman, machinist of Drury-lane Theatre, at-
tended upon an adjourned summon; charging hiaa with
wilful perjury, and the case, attracted quite a crowd of
theatrical celebrities to the court.
Madame Caradori was again examined by Mr. Lewis,
for the prosecution, and cross-examined by Mr. E.
Lewis, relative to the terms of her engagement " under
the new management" at Drury-lane, on the re-openitT
of the theatre, on the 12th of August, till the 19th. She
stated that she was to receive a moiety of the receipts,
after the orchestra and chorus had been paid ; but she
did not consent to any partnership arrangement.
Mr. Henry hoped the real question before the court
would be adhered to. Did Madame Caradori (or
Signor Pavesi) make the alleged statement relative to
their intention to leave England on the 21st ? That was
what the defendant had sworn to in his affidavit.
Signor Pavesi, otherwise Guiseppe Cogna, was then
examined in French, and declared that he had never
spoken to Sloman in his life, and could not, in fact,
speak the English language. He had declined to sing
at Drury-lane after the 19th. Both Madame Caradori
and himself expressed this determination a day or two
before the 19th. He recollected dining with Mr. Oswald
and Mr. Jarrett, at Madame Caradori's house, during
that week, but he did not on that, or on any other
occasion, say he was going to leave England. He had
no other engagement, and had received no answer from
Milan respecting an application which he had made for
one. He was not engaged to sing with Madame
Caradori at Manchester, although he applied for
an engagement. No demand was ever made upon
him for the money claimed by Sloman. On the
Friday previous to his arrest a Mr. Levy, Mr. Jarrett's
solicitor, came to him in the green-room and wished to
speak to him in secret. He addressed him in French,
telling him (witness) that if he and Madame Caradori
refused to sing after the 19th, the orchestra and chorus
would apply for a judge's order to have them arrested.
In consequence of this intimation he at once proceeded
to the stage, and addressed the orchestra, hoping that
some one amongst them would be able to translate his
French into English. He was assured of the contrary,
and Mr. Jarrett told him that he had been deceived.
(The particulars of the arrest have already appeared.)
Mr. Genese, landlord of the Crown and Cushion, in
Russell-court, was called for the prosecution. He stated
that Mr. Sloman used his house, and was frequently
there in company with foreigners. He declined to give
any opinion as to whether Sloman could speak French
or Italian. He had no belief upon the subject. Could
not say whether the defendant appeared to understand
them or not, and did not know the difference between
Italian and French when he heard it. (A laugh.)
Mr. Lewis—Then I will call the defendant's solicitor
as a witness upon this point.
Mr. E. Lewis assured him that he had no knowledge
upon the subject.
Mr. Lewis proposed, under these circumstances, to
examine Mr. Lawrence Levy, the solicitor, who drew
up the affidavit in question, and who appeared subse-
quently to have transferred the business into the hands
of Mr. E. Lewis, who now attended for Sloman.
Mr. Levy—l am a solicitor, practising at Falcon-
court. lam not Mr. Sloman's attorney in this matter.
lam not his attorney at all. I have been spoken to on
matters, and have known him personally during the
whole of Mr. Jarrett's management at Drury-lane, in
my capacity as Mr. Jarrett's solicitor. I cannot say
that Mr. Sloman is unable to speak French or Italian,
Ido not know. I have never said that he had told me
he could not.
Mr. Lewis (exhibiting a letter)—ls this letter in your
hand-writing ?
Mr. Levy—l claim to be exempted from any reply in
reference to a privileged communication.
Mr. Lewis—But you have said that you were not the
attorney of Mr. Sloman in this matter.
Mr. Levy—l was acting for him as such at that time.
Mr. Henry—Were you retained ?
Mr. Levy—l had no written retainer.
Mr. henry—As a professional man you must know
the meaning of the question perfectly well. If you were
not retained you cannot claim the exemption due to a
privileged communication.
Mr. Levy—l will swear that I was retained as Mr.
Sloman's attorney at that time, but I declined to act
afterwards.
Mr. Lewis—Was the refusal to act prior orsubsequent
to the preparation of the affidavit??
Mr. Levy—Am I bound to answer that question ?
Mr. Heury—Certainly.
Mr. Levy—lt was at the time when the affidavit was
being prepared.
Mr. Lewis—Were you Sloman's attorney when the
affidavit was sworn ?
Mr. Levy—Yes.
Mr. Henry—Had you ceased to be his attorney when
application was made for the arrest of Madame Cara-
dori and Signor Pavesi ?
Mr. Levy—Yes.
Mr. Lewis—Were you present at Judge's chambers,
with Mr. Sloman, when he was sworn''
Mr. Levy—l cannot say.
Mr. Henry—Did you attend upon the judge's clerk
outside the chambers
Mr. Levy —I cannot say whether I did or did not.
Mr. Henry—Let him refer to the document.
Mr. Levy—That is only a copy. I could tell if I could
see the original affidavit.
Mr. Henry—You are aware, as an attorney, that the
original document is kept by the judge's clerk.
Mr. Levy—l thought he had left it here.
By Mr. Lewis—l swear that I did not apply for
the affidavit—not personally. I think the clerk of Mr.
Lewis applied for it, but cannot say. I was not

present. -
Mr. Henry—Let that be taken down.
Witnessl did not appoint to meet Mr. Sloman at
the chambers. I saw him there and spoke to him. The
affidavit was written by me, and I think I gave it to Mr.
Lewis, but I cannot say where. I took a written re-
tainer to Mr. Lewis after I bad declined to act for Mr.
Sloman. I think it was signed at the theatre. Before
preparing the affidavit I did not inquire for vouchers or
accounts to see if the claim was correct, because I was
aware of the whole transaction. I did not communicate
the vontents of the paper to my client, Mr. Sloman, not
deeming it necessary to do so. I think Mr. Lewis pre-
pared the writ to arrest. I gave no instruction to the
officer respecting it. I did not tell the officer that Ma-
dame Caradori was to be at Mr. Jarrett's in the evening,
and it could be served upon her there, on leaving.
Mr. Henry—Did you make any application to Madame
Caradori for payment of the alleged debt before prepar-
ing the affidavit.
Mr. Levy—Certainly not. No written application.
Mr. Henry—ls it usual for attorneys to apply for a
judge's order to arrest without a previous application for
payment of the debt .
Mr. Levy—lt is sometimes usual, and sometimes un-
usual.
Mr. Henry—Do you giv. e that answer upon reflection,
wita?nt to amend it.
Or do you wish to amendnot
Mr. Levy—l do . I cannot
I have done
speak as to the practice of other attorneys.
sometimes the one and sometimes the other. If I am
a letter first, I do so ; not without.
told to write
Mr. Henry—Why did you shift the matter over to
another attorney, after preparintr.thjeararffietdta,s attorney, 1
do so. vit
Mr. Le
vy—Because,being 3
thought it desirable to to the
Mr.
Mr. Levy—l have said that
Henry—'Wo made taplpl
heniacantnioont
distinctly
member. '
Mr. Henry—lt was only on the 19th of last month.
Do you mean to swear that y
Mr. Levy—l won't swear to don't know.
that u
atl do
been
the
o r do
Mr. Henry—And yet you have not.
Mr.defendant's
attorney in the matter up to that moment. It is very
singul that should not know.
Mr.ar Lewis you
an —Who hded the paper up to the judge'
Mr. Levy—l cannot say whether I handed it across
myself, or whether Mr. Lewis's clerk did.;
Mr. Henry—Take that down.
Mr. Lewis observed that it would be necessary to ask
S .lor another remand, as be should want summonses for
T the attendance of some of Mr. Slornan's family, to state
C47,,t. ,111.
•_ IT
~h:/r dlfendantcan speak French or Italian.
like.
;t; _./).4._... ~.....H., .
.Henry—You.
.can have any summons you
.4.a-ftb, .1....i.-/..,.4..aar. Levy—And in the meantime I presume I shall
1-4 . )e f-', iThre. an opportunity of inquiring into some of the
r ~,:j,,,,:tnatttnza abet which I have been in doubt. .
• ..,;, /',. "`M— you have said to-day has been
,rt\. 71; - / ns and now I require you_ to aig• a it, If, at
..--• ---
.... ,
,_
vi r.f ;lA. , ?-4Akr,l 't," " - - ... • - , -.<,• < f • • _ .....J.

..........re
the next examination, you prefer to amend, your evi-
dence, you can do so.
Mr. Levy—The deposition represents me as stating
that I did not make the application. I said that I did
not make it personally.
Mr. Henry—Now, I must ask you, did you make it
directly or indirectly ?
Mr. Levy—lt was made indirectly through me.
Mr. Henry—Did the judge (Barton Martin) put any
questions ?
Mr. Levy—l think be asked who
.the parties were,
and he may have put some other questions.
Mr. Henry—To whom were those questions ad-
dressed? To you?
Mr. Levy—No. They must have been addressed to
the person who got the order.
Mr. Henry—You heard the questions put. Have
you any doubt that the judge addressed them to you
personally 1
Mr. Levy—l suppose they were addressed to me.
Mr. Henry—Hare you any doubt of it ?
Mr. Levy:--No.
Mr. Henry—Let that be added to the depositions.
The proceedings were then adjourned till next week.