The Sun.
London, England, 1831-02-01 00:00:00

RIGHTS OF THE PATENT THEATRES.

The arguments on this case were renewed last
night. The Court, however, did not sit till eight
o'clock, as it was understood that the Solicitor-
General's reply would conclude the proceedings.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL replied—He should
occupy but little of their time ; not that he under-
valued the learning, the eloquence, or the acting of
any of his Learned Friends, but from a feeling that
be was not there as an actor to amuse the public,
but as lin advocate, who had to confine himself only
to the real points of the case. In the outset he
begged to observe, that he certainly had expected
that his Learned Friends would have confined them-
selves to the written case on either side. He had
cirefully confined himself to that course, and he,
therefore, trusted that their Lordships would not
allow their attention to be distracted by what had
fallen from his Learned Friends, and who had tra-
velled entirely out of the written case. Their Lord-
ships would recollect what he had endeavoured to
do in his opening. He had first endeavoured to show,
as Mr. Arnold had set himself forward for the peti-
tion of a boon from the Crown, that his client had
some claims to make such a petition, and that his
eonduct had ever been such as not to exclude him
from such a privilege. It was for this reason that he
bad spoken so much of the first representation of Mr.
Arnold; and with all the ingenuity which had been
displayed by his Learned Friends, at least this was
true, that not one of them had ventured to attack
the good frith of that first representation ; and he,
therefore, begged still to rest much of his client's
upon that point. The Learned Solicitor then
referred to the joint license granted to Mr. Arnold
and Colonel Greville, and contended that it made
no difference whether that license had been granted
to Mr. Arnold or to the two conjointly ; the act
was in itself a single act, and established the case of
a permissien being given to perform during the win-
. ter season. In addition to this, two years after-
wards, another license, concurrent with the other,
was graoted to Mr. Mash, as a respectable trustee
for all patties. This went on for three years, and
the following three Mr. Arnold was employed as
the director of Drury-lane, so that of course in that
character it could not be expected that he should
use his own license for the purpose of establishing
a rival theatre. What then became of the argu-
ment that Mr. Arnold has been content with a
limited license, and had made common cause with
Druser-lane and Coven'-garden ? The fact was that
he made the same representation then as now,
and had always advanced the same claim. It
saga true that they did make common cause, but it
was on a written st iitement, that Drury-lane and Cc-
vent-garden could not complain that he showed
hims;ll an insidious ally, or had deceived them with
respect io Iris demands. Mr. Harrison had relied
on the opinion of Lord Sidmouth; but whatever
respect Ire might have for that Nobleman, at all
events, it teas to be remembered that an opinion
was no judgment, and that the Secretary of State
had no power of adjudication. But besides this,
;air. Harrison had also altogether failed in showing
what Ire bad assumed—that Mr. Arnold had been
heard on this agitation of the question, and had had
full opportunity afforded him of making out a case
for himself. A great deal had been said about the
• merits of the winter theatres. He had made no
eharee against them, and therefore he was much
astonished at the display that had been made of
good actors and of good plays. Not content with
this, however they brought an accusation against
.Mr. Arnold. They laid to his charge the sin of
eeTamission, for they said that he had produced no
such plays or actors; but they seemed entirely to
have forgotten that it was they who had shut up his
theatre far the greater part of the year, and abso-
lutely prevented his making any such efforts. But
Mr. Arnold was also accused of the sin of omission,
aor it was said that he had stepped out of his license
—ebused it—and had actually produced an operetta
take„ ficm the Tart:lP of Moliere, under the title
of Tire H/poerite. Now it was curious enough that
lie teas able to answer this charge by the aid of the
Lord Hertford, the Lord Chamberlain, on whom
fl:e other ride so =eh relied ; for it actually air,.
peered that this very piece was licensed by Lord
Hertford for performance at tire Lyceum. Ex uno
disce ornnes—be would not enter upon other such
point=, for he thought that this one was sufficient
to explain the nature of them all. But not content
ther own learning, they had called in his
Learned Friend, the great actor, from the Hay-
market (Sir C. Wetherell) to follow on the same
side; but it appeared to him that not one of the
Anparrations
• • • thrown out against Mr. Arnold had
been substantiated, and it happened here, as it
always did in similar cases, that the charge which
failed in proof recoiled on the heads of those who
made it. He was not there to praise Mr. Arnold ;
there was no necessity for it ; all that he had to do
was to show that there was no charge against Mr.
Arnold's conduct, and that in this point, therefore,
Ire was entitled to what be prayed for as much as
any other subject of the realm, and which lay within
the gift and prerogative of his Majesty, not for the
particular benefit of any of his servants or house-
bold, but for the gem.ral good and advautage of
the co.mmuefty at large, Mr. Harrison had moat
;earnestly divided his - arguments into numerous
heads, through which ire had eo intention
est following his Learned Friend, who had so far
lost in historical research and learning the argue
meat in favour of his clients, as to tell them how
fond tire English people had always been of plays
and acting, and had actually taken them as far back
as the times of Fitz-Stephen, the Monk. His
Learned Friend had argued that Mr. Arnold had
cnrfeited his license, by not using it for some time
after it bad been'granted. If non-usage and mis-
conduct were to Ouse the forfeiture of a patent,
then Drury-lane had forfeited the patent in the time
of Queen Anne, when for some misconduct a letter
was sent by the Lord Chamberlain, which so acted
,fvon the performers as to make them retire mime-
s:earn, If NI, Arnold's non-usage and unsconduct

were to set aside his license, what were they to
think of one of the great patent theatres that had
been silenced and kept in disgrace for a long time in
consequence of the Chamberlain's letter. How then,
could persons presume to come before their Lord-
ships and set forth that ground as a legitimate pre-
tence for refusing Mr. Arnold an extension of license?
After this he should ask their Lordships, with per-
fect confidence, to consider sir. Arnold and his com-
petitors as standing upon the same ground and the
same merits in every point. With respect to the
common cause which the little theatres had made
with the great Moguls, who fought with elephants,lie
could only say, the little potentate of the Haymarket
and others would soon find that if Mr. Arnold were
defeated they would be likewise swallowed up. A
great point urged on the other side was the haul,-
rupt state of the two theatres, the difficulties which
they were labouring under, and the compassion that
ought consequently to be afforded to them. What
however was that argument, not founded on public
principle, when compared to the disadvantage that
at present accrues to public taste and amusement ?
Another point was the injury that the landlord of
the theatre would suffer from the extension of the
license to Mr. Arnold ; but was that to be placed
in juxta-position with the public benefit, even sup-
posing that matters would come to the very worst,
as predicted by his Learned Friends, although he
did not believe it ? He, however, thought that that
Nobleman was too embued with the public spirit, to
mind an individual injury when a great public benefit
would ensue. But he did not believe that the
ground would at all suffer, taking into consideration
the number of buildings that might be erected on
the site of the two theatres. It had been stated
that an immense number of persons were dependent
upon the existing monopoly, and that in the event
of it being overturned, they would be cast upon the
world. It would, indeed, be a great misfortune, and
that he should greatly deplore ; bat he did riot believe
that it would take place. Those persons who were now
crowded in one or two theatres would go to other
theatres of smaller dimensions,and become powerful
actors at one place, when they had been but minor
actors at a former. An allusion had been made to the
insolvency of one theatre at one time, and its redemp-
tion from ruin by the appearance of one or two per-
formers of very great talent. Was not this a proof
that the public loved the drama, when represented
with ability, and that the houses would always be
filled if there were sufficient attraction ? He did
not mean to say that such would be the case if
theatres were to be multiplied ad ivinitum ; but
that would be an evil that would very soon find its
level. The consequence of throwing open the stage
would be to encourage the performance of sterling
dramas, to bring forward young and rising talent ;
whereas it was often repressed at the outset in the
great houses; from the inconvenience of their size
and the nature of the plays that were performed. He
should, therefore, not rely upon the monopoly
Statute of James 1., but the simple rational ground,
whether or not it was advantageous to the King's
subjects to have a fair competition allowed with the
two great theatres in representing those amusements
which were becoming so general. To conclude, he
hoped the question would be taken into considera-
tion with reference to the public alone. If they did
approve of Mr. Arnold's theatre and the perform-
ances represented, then he would be right ; if they
did not approve of them, then he would be wrong,
and the great theatres would stand quite uninjured.
In sitting down he should leave his client's case
with perfect safety its the hands of their Lordships,
and he trusted that they would confide in the public
discernment as to whether it was expedient to have
the time extended for Mr. Arnold's performances.
The Solicitor-General having sat down—
The LORD CHANCELLOR spoke as follows :
When this case was first submitted to the Kiug,
his Majesty deemed it to be one of sufficient im-
portance to demand a more than ordinary consider-
ation. The prerogative of his Crown, the claims
of individuals to his Royal favour—even the pre-
tensions of private right, appeared to be involved
in the discussion. Beyond these matters, others
affecting his subjects at large seemed to be con-
cerned. The interests of genius and of taste—the
innocent amusements of the people—their manners
—even in some sort their intellectual improve-
ment, certainly their morals, might by no remote
possibility receive benefit or sustain injury from the
result. Wherefore his Majesty was graciously
pleased to refer the whole matter to his chief law
advisers, and was further pleased to permit that the
discussion should be carried on in public, to the
end that the more satisfaction might be afforded to
all who have an interest in the subject matter.
This debate is now closed, and, after conferring
with the Learned Judges, who have condescended
to assist in the proceeding, I shall humbly tender to
his Majesty such advice as I shall deans it my duty
to lay before him.—The Court then broke up.

MAGAZINE DAY.

BLACKWOOD'S MAGAZINE.
PART I.

Toujours perdrix ! Politics—politics—no-
thing but politics—such is now becoming the gene-
ral complaint against this otherwise admirable Ma-
gazine. The present number is full of them.
We have no less than three long elaborate articles
on this one subject—a sad dose, and not to be
thought of without a shudder, " The South
Stack" is a delightful article, descriptive of the
Western coast of the Isle of Anglesea, and re-
plete with anecdotes illustrative of its danger to
mariners. " Noctes Ambrosiante" are not so
good as usual. They are too grave, too me-
thodical, consequently not a little out of keep-
ing. " Ignoramus" puts forth some fine
thoughts on the subject of the Fine Arts ;" and
" The Story of A zimantium" is an eloquent and
impressive tale of the days of Attila the Hun—
to whom Mr. Alaric Watts is indebted for his
second Christian denomination of " Attila."
The tale we see is to be continued, it will be
read with general interest. The incidents are
really striking.