The Sun.
London, England, 1831-09-05 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS.--:(THIS DAY.)

c before the opening of the House the lobbies were
"'aided with theatrical characters, in consequence of the
aPPetsl rest acting Covent-garden theatre being specially
PPoiated for hearing to-day.
eltlte LORD CHANCELLOR entered the House at eleven
~,,wite and after the reading of prayers immediately pro-
-"ed to hear this important case. The other Peers in
Ititetelance were Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Runkett, and Earl
I{:lBtavee and Lord Stuart De Rothsay—Miss Fanny
ntlile was in Sir Thomas Tyrwhitt'e box.
HARRIS V KEMBLE.
c:rlds was; an appeal from the decision of the late Lord
Pell"soce!lor (Lord Lyndhurst) dismiss'ng the Bill of the ap-
ehettteTr. d reversing Cie, order of Sir John Leach, the Vice-
In the y' ear 1809, the father of the present aps
Pe(l4,lt' Mr. T. Harris, a Mr. G. White, the late J. Philip
th rune the late Ann Alartendale and the appellant, were
eL''''St Proprietors of Covent-garden theatre. By virtue
Iva:. agreement made among these parties, Thomas Harris
per created manager of this theatre, at a salary of 1,0001.
Aell=num. At the time of his father's death the ap-
hitsot, who hadmaterially assisted him, took upon
aft:4lf the managemment of the theatre, which shortly
th rwetrls was objected to by the respondents, alleging
1444- 'Ho course of management pursued by tbe.lite
Tiio-
a Itirris and the appellant was too extravagant
the "pensive, and that in consequence of that
go debts of the theatre had not been discharged
110„"icklY as they otherwise might have been.
th—eyn this disputes arose, the respondents insisting that
tr Were entitled to a share in the management and con-
-41,4 of the expenditure of the theatre, which were not
~r,Entltiottted till December. 1821, when an arrangement was
the:, to that the respondents should take a lease of the
In the course of the negotiations for a lease the
thant offered to give a rent of 13,5001. per annum for
--eatre ; but this offer was rejected by the respondents,
0,44 Were determined to remove the appellant from the
tiit."4l(ol of the theatre. In 1822 an agreement was
-,,tred into by all the parties to demise the theatre
and Fm bee, for the term of ten
apb-L' at a rent of 10,5007., which sum was to be
1,,,,17, in discharge of the debts of the theatre, and
agr-e"wee Willett, and Forbes, bound themselves by that
girile,ktnt to perform the covenants of it, not only as re.-
Co"' themselves, but also as it was applicable to Francis
age who 11,110 repre,ented Mrs. Martendale. It was also
of that the appellant, until the debts due at the date
read agreement were satisfied, should receive certain
Were to the amount of 1,360/. ; but that after such debts
areae Paid the appellant should repay to the proprietors the
1t5,,,44t of 5 12th part of such rents, with interest thereon.
11,,rdiately after the execution of the agreement the appel-
Puebegave up possession of the theatre to Kemble, Willett, and
tad *i who shortly afterwards discharged the then resure!
aPPointed a Mr. Robertson. in
1823 Mr. t
Fraancis
filed his bill in the Court of Chancery, stating that
—2ltlei 'Willett, and Forbes hail not specifically Per-- !
ig ed the Covenants of the agreement of 1812. and prey_
te eet•he talc;og of the accounts and the appointment of a
Unclelver• Mr. Robertson was appointed the receiver
r the order of the Court. The appellant, considering
ptleltwagetrient of the theatre by Kemble, Willett, and
his nq consistentl,
with the agreement of 1822, filed
thsll" in 1821, to compel the specific performance of
agteement ; and upon the case coining on for
sego
ernient before his Honour the Vice-Chancellor, he
• On eed the specific performance of the agreement.—
Alf the 19th of June, 1827, the Vice-Chancellor,
the•lnTl in the interim be, n appointed Master of
1,0 ,``°lll, the respondents presented a petition to the
heardr° Chancellor, praying that the cause might be re-
day before the' then Vice-Chancellor, and that an early
• sat);,inight be appointed for the purpose, and that the decree
ue late Vice-Chancellor might be reversed. The
11 C1:1„ se' however, by consent, was heard before the Lord
vet-neellor, who in May, 1829, was pleased to re-
st,„, the decree of the Court below, and dismissed the
.I:,.e"dant's bill. From that judgment the present appeal
. .4 brOuglit.
kpik.Sit EDWARD SCGDEN, Mr. FINNEY, and Mr. JAMES
ti'suare'l as Counsel for the appellant, Mr. PEPYS, Mr.
ap4t—ticiii:ti
ItTox and Mr. LOWNDES appeared for the re-
tioStir EDWARD SUCHEN was addressing their Lordships
sk,e Part of the appellant when our reporter left, and it
I‘7", dreg extremely probable that the case would occupy
rzt, or two in argument.

iR Alai!

e SI

Matl

w..-sji

a the
Gregg'
dad PII
and Rd

Thool

THE FUNDS.-(THIS DAY.)

CITY, T TVEL VE 0' CL 0 CK.
/IP PETERSBURGH, AUGUST 29.—Since the COM-
: 4,-I"nent of the epidemic at St. Petersburgh the total
1,4,'" of sick to the 16th of Augu,t was 8,679 ; died
; and, to the 29th, 8,691 ; died 4,464.
/ *O Hungary 35,342 persons have been attacked, of
6,078 have revivered, 16,887 have died, and
it 10.7.. are under cure.
1 slre Private information states that. the Russians have
W anY brought up their bartering train of artillery before
p ittgaw.
1)1

THE FUNDS.
bultVith the exception of the express from Paris, and the
144 ch steamer, we have no arrivals of consequence this
The French Funds have again improved. After
44,ge hours the Three per Cents. were at 60f. ; in con-
„l4nce of which our Funds, which left off on Saturday
I opened 'at 82i; they were afterwards done at
..,1 3-, and are at present 821, alternately buyers and
',tiers, with little doing.
The private letters from Brussels state that all was tran-
Wl in that country.
p:l'6 Hamburg steamer is hourly expected, which, it is
o~:fel, will bring iniorniation from Pdand of some im-
, 111 the Foreign Market Russian Stock has improved.

tiaVc..,
Stock shut
1,7 ditto '199 200
Attu cent '
4 t°' for ih (ins. 8'21'4
Per cent. ;ectect.