The Sun.
London, England, 1813-08-27 00:00:00

POLICE.

PANTHEON. TtIEATIU .
MAaLaom3trott-sTttloo..:l,--Yesterday the atten-
tion of:the.Sitting.MagiStrzites was occupied for
several hours, in hearing fnfOrmations against the
Performers at the Pantheon Theatre ; wheethe
evidence of William Martin, on:Which the in-
formations ‘vere founded, was.read ; importing,
ttn John Ilill had, without license from the
Lord Chamberlain, performed ,in An Opera, called
TI ilaanted Tower, on the,29th of :Lily, 1813;
and likewise on two other occasions there speci-
fied.; and dahning the penalties, one-half to the
pro and the other half to the poor of the

parkh.
Lonstiale was then examined, on the part
of the.proteention, by Mr. roOLEY, who stated in
evidence that he had been at the Pantheon On
the 29th of July, and hail taken a play-hdl (the
same With one that was shown to him) from a

woman who sold fruit ";. that the play was The
flauntud Tower, in whicb Mr. Hill performed Lord
Lord William ; there was no diOreuce betwixt
the play and those acted at other Theatres, ex-
cept from the want of memory iu the performers,
and the occasional touching the chord of a piano-
forte,
The witness was then cross-exaMined by Mr.
ALLaY, Counsel for the defendant. 'He admitted
that be was employed about theLycettin'Theatre,
though be did not know that the prosecution
arose froat that quarter. lie had been sent by
?41r, Raymond, one of the proprietors of the Ly,
ceum, but had no promise of the penalty, and.
would not accept it, as he went from a sense of
duty to his employers. Being naked if the per-
formance was not what was called recitative, he
answered in the negative."
Mr. Mash, Chief Clerk in the Lord Chamber-
lain's Office, was next examined, and stated, that
no' license bad been granted to the Pantheon
Theatre. Having mentioned, in answer to a ques-
tion by Mr. Alley, that the licenses were entered
in a hook, Mr. Alley contended that the book
should be produced. This was opposed by Mr.
Pooley, on the ground that 'the book was of the
same description .with the journals of the House
of Commoni, or the records of the lndia.Com-
pany. The witness then swore, that no license
had been granted. To a question from Mr. Alley
if any other had applied for a license, the answer
was in the affirmative.

Mr. ALLtCY then -briefly addressed the Court in
behalf of Mr. Hill the delendaut, and contended
•`• t fiat no-cose laid been' Made out, and that his cli-
ent had o:fended against no law.
Mr. Poot.EY, for the prosecution, argued, that
the receipt of money at the door was
,quite
dent to bring home the case to the defendant, '
unless it could be shown that he performed from a
charitable motive, or merely as an amateur. •
Mr. At LEy contended, that it. •Itad not been
proved, that the money had been paid to 11111 by
the door-keeper. 11• Ir. Cundee,- indeed, had been
tined by the evidence, hut it did not go beyond
lout ; 'and upon the principles laid down by his
Learned Friend, an 1-lamination might also be
lotige4 against Mr. Coates. The Lord Chamber-
lain (he contended) had here no right to inter-
pose The statute, by which the jurisdiation of
• the Lord Chamberlain had been created, had
passed at a line 'when the wits Of the day were
very, troublesome to the alien Administrations ;
and the statute empowered the LOrd Chamberlain
to look into the subject matter of any piece,
and, if hethought roper, to withhold a license ;
bat with the locality he had- nothing to do, as ,
the place depended wholly upon the Magistrates.
1t this were not the ease, why did not the Lard
Chamberlain inquire into the Surrey Theatre. Ile
(the Learned Counsel) denied that the authority
of the Lord Chamberlain extended to this case :
could that-be nroved, then the argument was at-
an cud. •The reason of enacting the statute (the
10th of Gsairge 11.) plainly shewed, why his 'au-
thority' did not extend to the place, but solely to
the matter, of the repres,entatton. Mr. Alley, in
e6nelihioa, produced and read the license that had
been granted by the Magistrates to the Pantheon,
and which, he Contended, fully warranted the per-
formances there.. •
Mr. Pooty, controverted the positions of the
Counsel for 'the defence, Admitting that the MI-.
• thority of the Lord Chaniherlain had not been suf-
ficiently, defined by the first Apt, it had been by
subsequent ones, partiettlarly the Act of the 25th,
ui Ceorge 11.
After t few' observations from Mr. ALLEY, the
Magistrates were of opinion, that though the, Act
of-' the 2.7,th of King George 11. did not apply 'to
the present case, yet it plainly came. within the
scope of the Act of tlo 10(11 of the same reign ;
and accordiugly found the defentti;n liable in the
penalties of :;0/.
Mr. Bill :vas also convicted in two other pc-.
Dairies of 50, each, On tile same evidence, for
the part of Orlaado, to Tic t"a-
tio,,t, Ow `ii:tt tat ..111y, awl the part of 21,fac
iaaait, in 'Vic. Opc.;ra, on the h ii :Augnit.
11r..\t.1.1 ; gave nutlet: of an intention to ap.
eat to the r..2nart.or
Mr, iosiTil Wh l a .op tvalsm proceeded avinst.
on three infornia; lust;, for hAving perfonned at
the svne es:c. ou tie '.:title of .1111 y,
mitin, Th:: Cabinet ;un the2;lth Jniy, Edward,
in The Mau t,ql owet ; on tile 6th August, Mat
o' the Mint, in MP Opera ; ..and Was con-
.
ViCfed, On eVitidtlC ' as above, in three pc..
a aides of 50/, each.
Mr. ALLEY put in tits same (10nm-for the.de-
feinkint, and:gave notice of his intention to apl
} eat to the o:tarter Sessions. ,
Mr.'PooLEV said, that if the performances were
, pot stopped., many more informations would be
a-ed against the performers.
Mr. AL.I.E7 Said,rat that rate it was high tune
for the Ivgisl'ittire to interfere.
'Attr, thanthers, an,:)thei• performer, availed him-
self an' ki Wiliti.inwr, Mid got ofL -
A Mr. .times, nt JonaS' another 'of the per-
fOrniers, was expected to appeue to be prneeeaied
against as a vagrant, he did not•ppene, tend
it wvis prOVCd summons
teas not served
oa 11131). •