The Sun.
London, England, 1831-01-12 00:00:00

if prosperous, until his whole and complete plan shall be
realised and perfection attained." Such was the language
of the first memorial Mr. Arnold had presearteel to the
Crown. The first paragraph of that memorial set forth
Mr. Arnold's plan, which was to found &Theatre in oppo-
sition to and in rivalry of the Italian Opera House, and
therefore a Theatre to be open during the winter months;
and the second paragraph, without abandteng the ori-
ginal and complete plan, gave the reasons why Mr. Ar
mild did not think it advisable, et the particular period of
his first memorial to attempt to carry it into immediate
execution. The Court would observe also that Mr. Ar-
nold, in the second paragraph, expressly declared it to be
his intention, if he met with the encouragement of the
public, to carry his original end extended project into effect.
If, then, he was right in the construction which he hail
put upon the memorial, viz., that it was the avowed in-
tention of Mr. Arnold to raise an opposition to the Italian
Opera, could it be doubted for a moment by any rational
man, that Mr. Arnold cm-aux:plated the foundation of a
Theatre to be open during the winter months, when
the town was full, and the Italian Opera in full play ?
Such was the design set forth by the first paragraph,
and it was confirmed, and not given up or abandoned
by the second paragraph. But the prospectus, the paper
to which he had referred, continued, and stated that Mr.
Arnold " had consulted many friends," who concurred in
recommending him to apply to the Lord Chamberlain, and
had enabled him so far to mature his designs as to put it
in his power to entertain a strong expectation of being in
a position to open a new Theatre in the ensuing autumn
or following spring. • If then any doubt could have been
entertained as to the nature of Mr. Arnold's plan at first,
surely such language as that which he had read must have
removed it. There was no concealment. Those who were
most interested in the subject—the Crown, whose grace
and favour were appealed to, and the public, whose amuse-
ments were to be affected—were all fully apprised of the
designs and the intentions of Mr. Arnold. His object was
to found an English Opera, which was to rival, if not su-
persede, the Italian Opera; this could only be done by the
establishment of a Winter Theatre. But the memorial
proceeded to state that Mr. Arnold was fully aware of the
objections the Lord Chamberlain had to increasing the
number of Theatres. Why, what was the meaning of
such language? Could it be supposed that Mr. Arnold
had any other meaning than that of increasing the number
of the Winter Theatres—the number of the Theatres to be
open at one and the same time? Further remark
upon that point appeared to him unnecessary. The
memorial proceeded to state that Mr. Arnold would
not enter into the many powerful reasons which
induced him to form his original plan, but he would
content himself with merely soliciting a license to
authorise the performance of musical dramatic per-
formances or operas, and pieces of action ; as thereby he
should only be understood as laying the foundation of that
permanent plan which he had formed. What was to he
understood by such language? Surely not that Mr. Arnold
asked for permission to open a Theatre at the period when
he could expect only empty bmches. But it must be con-
cluded, and indeed it must be evident, that the intention
was that the experiment should be made at a time when
competition could be fairly entered upon, which was only
when the Italian Opera was open. Some other points in
Mr. Arnold's memorial were worthy of notice. He pro-
fessed it to be his desire to introduce some new mechanical
principles into the management and production of scenery,
and it could not therefore be supposed that he did not con-
template any thing short of a perfect Theatre ; no mere
school for musical science would have fulfilled his ideas.
The memoiial also undertook that the Theatre should be
so conducted as to give security and protection to per-
sons of rank and respectability visiting it ; and in that
provision it was plain a Winter Theatre was contem-
plated, for in the summer months it was well known
the town was comparatively empty. The memorial proceeded
by stating, that should those intentions fortunately meetwith
the approval of the Lord Chamberlain, the memorialist
trusted his Lordship would deem it right to authorise by
his sanction the performance of musical pieces and ballets
of action, to be carried on in some Theatre of a conve-
nient size, and in a suitable situation. He then came to
a very important point in the case, and that was the cha-
racter, as to time, of the license applied for by Mr. Ar-
nold. Having paved the way, and fairly stated his ob-
jects, Mr. Arnold told the Lord Chamberlain for what he
applied for a license; but did he ask for one for any par-
ticular months? No; there was nothing specific, as to
time, in his application. His object was to found a
Theatre in opposition to the Italian Opera, which was
then the only Theatre encouraging music, and that of a
foreign growth. Mr. Arnold, however, sought no pa-
tent, no exclusive rights to the prejudice of his fellow-
subjects, or to the curtailment of the prerogative of the
Crown. He merely asked for a license, which would not
release him front the controul and authority of the Lord
Chamberlain, but which would annually subject him to
the exercise of that power. Such a course of proceeding
required no remark from him. 31r. Arnold proceeds to
say that his first idea was to purchase the Theatre situate
in the Strand, and then to state his views with respect to
it. Now their Lordships would observe that although
the license was to be granted annually, it was not to
expire with the year, excepting upon misconduct.
The power of superintendence and controul was very
properly reserved to the Crown, in order that any
abuse might be corrected, or that any impropriety,
if such occurred, might he altered through a proper in-
terference. To such a superior Mr. Arnold had no ob-
jection. For several years the license had been granted
to him, and he would appeal to the conduct of Mr.
Arnold as the best proof it was possible to give of the wil-
lingness of his client that it should still be continued. He
had thought it right to go through this memorial, as it
would put their Lordships in possession of the declared
and real intentions of his client, and at the same time
plainly show upon what representations the license bad
been granted. No language he could command could
equal the clear, candid, and sincere language of the memo-
rial, or be so deserving of the attention of the Lord Chain.
berlain, through whom it was addressed to the Crown, or
of their Lordships before whom he now quoted it. In
this part of the case he had nothing to do with hearsay
_ .

evidence. He spoke upon ascertained facts. In 1509 a
license was granted to Mr. Arnold in consequence of the
memorial. The first license, which was the fruit of the

application he had referred to, and which he was most
anxious for their Lordships' attention, was granted at a
period when Mr. Arnold's intentions were fresh in the
memory of the Lord Chamberlain (Lord Dartmouth) and
of his late Majesty George 111. ; for that George 111. was
personally acquainted with all the circumstances of the
case, and took great interest in the designs set forth, there
was no doubt, and it was also equally well known that his
Majesty George 111. approved of the license to Mr. Ar-
nold as a memorial of his kindly feelings for Dr. Arnold.
The Loan CHANCELLOR—How is the paper marked to
which you are going, to refer'

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL doubted whether it was

marked. The license was dated the 26th of February,
1809. (The Lord Chancellor intimated he had found it.)
It was signed for S. J. Arnold, Esq., and au thoi ised him
to perform musical dramatic pieces and ballets of action at
the Theatre in the Strand for one year. Now what was
the plain, and indeed the only, meaning of that license ?
The perfin•mances were licensed for one year, and not for
the part of a year. Now, if he understood the arguments
or the case of his Learned Friends—and he did not mean
to say he was sure he did, for in theatrical affairs a loose-
ness in language and facts might be allowed which was
not permitted in law—but if he understood their case at

all, they must show that Mr. Arnold had not power
under the license to perform for a year. To sustai❑
their case his Learned Friends must show to their Lord-
ships that iMr. Arnold's attempting to perform for
one whole year would have been an infringement upon
their patent and inviolable rights. He contended, however,
taking the license according to the allowed and plain mean-
ing of the language, that Mr. Arnold had a perfect right to
perform a whole year without interruption. Such was
hie position upon the first license granted to Mr. Arnold.