The Sun.
London, England, 1854-02-16 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIG.E.ZVCE.—Fe7). 15.

tt EST.IIinWrER COUNTY CO URT.
(Before F. _Bayley, Esq., Judge.)
WILLOTT.--EXETER-lIALL WEDNESDAY
EVENING CONCERTS.
This ease excited a great deal of intere6t, and there
were a great many of the musical and theatrical Fofes•
::ion present to hear the result of the trial.

The plaintiff, who is a musician, sought to recover one
guinea for one night's performance, according to the
terms of the agreement, having been engaged to perform
for the seasons of 1853 and 1854. Plaintiff presented
himself on the 24th of January last, and he was informed
that the band had been reduced, and at the same time
was refused admission. Since then he had applied to
perform his duty, but was always refused, and he now
sued for the breach of contract.
The agreement having been put in, the judge remarked
that plaintiff might have sued for more.
Mr. Haynes, the defendant's solicitor, inquired it
plaintiff were aware that the seasons of 1853 and 1854
only comprised twelve nights ?
The Plaintiff—Certainly not.
Mr. Haynes—Were you not aware that in conse-
quence of some heavy losses the defendant sustained, the
band was reduced, and that your services would not be
required ?
Plaintiff—Yes, much to my surprise, as I stated on
the 24th January ; that was the first occasion, I swear
upon my oath. Mr. Thirlwell, our leader, did suggest
that we should give Mr. Willott one night to lessen his
expenses, and in the following week that gentleman
made a speech to the band, iu which he asked if they
would give him 1001. instead of 741., the result of the
previous arrangement ; and after some little time this
was agreed to, and was to be taken out of four nights'
performance, in equal proportions. Upon this occasion
Mr. Willott said he did not wish to give up the concerts, ,
and would continue them. Plaintiff's loss by this was
1/. 4s. Bd., and at the end of. that time, without receiv-
ins any notice, he was dismissed. In reply to a ques-
tion-Ly Mr. Haynes, plaintiff denied that any paper was
read to them, to the effect that the undersigned agreed
to give defendant 1001. for the seasomlBs3 and 1854.
The Judge—What do you consider the season ?
Plaintiff—l considered that if any concerts took place
between 1853 and 1854 I was engaged to perform at all
of them according to the aggreement I made.
The Judge—lt seems to me that plaintiff' is clearly
entitled to recover. It is an engagement for the season,
and there is nothing to bind plaintiff to play for any cer-
tain number of nights. The defendant puts out that the
first series of the concerts shall consist of twelve nights,
and if at the end of that he chooses to go on it must be
part of the same season ; therefore, it is clear that as
long as the hall continued open and the performance goes
on the season goes on also. I think the plaintiff is fully
entitled to his guinea, and he has been very moderate in
claiming, only that amount.
Verdict for the plaintiff.
LANCELLOTTI V. BERNI. STREET ORGAN PLAYERS AND

THEIR MASTERS.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, who is an
itinerant organ player, to recover from the defendant,
who was described as a chocolate maker residing at
King's-cross, to recover the sum of 61. 10s., for wages
alleged to be due at the rate of 10 francs or 10s. a-month,
from the Ist October, 1850, to the 14th October, 1851.
It appeared from the facts of the case, as stated by the
plaintiff, that the defendant, being in Italy in the year
1850, engaged the plaintiff to come over to England to
play the organ in the streets, which he represented as a
most lucrative calling. The plaintiff accordingly started
from Parma (where he had obtained a passport, in which
he was described as a travelling hawker or dealer in
wares) for Boulogne ; and having travelled the whole of
the distance on foot, he endured the greatest privations,
occasionally sleeping in sheds, stables, and out-houses,
and not unfrcquently in the open air. On the plain-
tiff's arrival in England, he was dully initiated as to
the course he was to puraitc in levying contributions on
the benevolent portion of -the priblic. The plaintiff ac-
cordingly commenced his operations, which eventually
proved pretty successful, the proceeds arising front which
the defendant took especial good care to secure to him-
self, while the plaintiff was most wretchedly fed and
housed, there being no less than forty-three of his unfor-
nate countrymen in one house, who slept three and
sometimes four in a bed, every two of whom were com-
pelled to subsist on 21b. of bread with a quantity of
water, into which a small portion of tea was infused to
give it a colouring. And in proof of the rapacity of the
defendant, the plaintiff stated that on one occasion a
drunken man had done some damage to his organ in the
street, but that on the following day he had made repa-
ration, and gave him 10s. for himself, which he was
compelled to hand over to the defendant. The plaintiff
likewise alleged that he had caught the small pox owing
to his having slept with one infected with that disease,
whereby he became an inmate of an hospital. The de-
fence set up was that the speculation, as it was termed,
was a partnership, the proceeds of which were to be
equally divided between them ; and that he (the de-
fsndant) had made several payments incidental to the
plaintiff's admission to the hospital, and which the de-
fendant now claimed by way of set off.
This view cf the case having been proved by the de-
fendant and corroborated by two witnesses,
His Honour, after commenting with much severity
on the conduct of such men as the defendant, who in-
veigled boys, and young men, such as the plaintiff, to
come over to this country, and whom they heartlessly
deprived of their hard earnings, left them, but too fre-
quently, in the most abject and destitute state to shift
for themselves—thought from the evidence adduce 1,
a partnership had been established, in which case he
had no alternative, however reluctant, but to direct
a verdict to be entered for the defendant, but without
costs.