The Sun.
London, England, 1823-05-15 00:00:00

[MORNING POST.]

-We have received all the Frepch Papers to
the 13th instant. They contain but little in addition to what
we published yesterday. It is admitted by the Gazette de
France, that since his junction with Milans, Mina " has a con-
siderable force under his command," but the report of a battle
between his army and that of Marshal Moncey is not men-
tioned. It is lamented, on the contrary, in the usual boastful
language of the French, that the Spanish Commander should
have fallen back without waiting the discharge of a can-
non ; as though it was through dread of the prowess of
the invaders that he abandoned his advanced positions,
and not because his flanks had been turned, an operation
which we are informed had been executed by Donnadieu and
the Baron d'Eroles. Private letters, however, continue to
speak of a sanguinary engagement in that quarter, and to
assert that the victory remained doubtful, which, even if
that were the case, would be nearly tantamount to a victory
on the part of the Constitutionalists. The Quotidienne . an-
nounces that a squadron, consisting of the Centaure, 80 guns ;
the Colosse, 74 ; the Themis frigate, a brig, _and two sloops,
had arrived before Saint
,Sebastian, to blockade that fortress.
It adds that a flag of truce, sent by the Admiral to the Governor,
had been admitted within 'the walls, and that several other
communications had passed between them in the course of the
day, which led to a hope that there was a,disposition to surren-
der. A private letter from Bayonne asserts, on the authority of
a British Officer who is said to have come all the way from Se-
vine, that the Cortes had declared the provinces of Biscay and
Navarre out of the pale of the law, and had invested Mina with
unlimited powers. The general impression, however, which
is in some degree countenanced by the tone of the French
Ministerial Papers, and the chagrin of the Ultras, is that ne-
gociations for peace have been opened with the Cortes, and that
some of the chief obstacles to an accommodation have been re-
moved. It is, indeed, scarcely possible, as we remarked yes.
terday, that if French Government have the least sentiment
of consistency, honour, and justice remaining, they should not
desist from the prosecution of an unprovoked war, after the
declaration made by the President of the Cortes, that Spain
knows, and is willing to correct the imperfections existing in
her Constitution (but not at the dictate of a Foreign Power,
or at the point of the bayonet) has annihilated the vain pretence
on which it was attempted to ,justify that war of aggression and
iniquity. In this case there is no doubt that our good offices
will be cheerfully employed to restore that peace which they
could not prevent from being infringed, and that we shall take
care, that whilst the perils of war are removed from the Penin-
sula, its independence shall not be impaired, or its Constitution
destroyed.

[MORNING HERALD.]
The continuance 'of the Irish Insurrection Act
seems to encounter no serious resistance • the Irish Members
give a more or less sincerely or affectedly reluctant consent ;
and it is admitted by all, that the state of the country is despe-
rate. The real question, we have reason to think, has been (felt
rather than expressed), not whether the Insurrection Act 'should
or should not be continued, but whether a preference should be
given to it over the Proclamation of Martial Law. The Irish
Government has the merit of deciding for the more lenient—
or more properly speaking, the less terrible course, and un-
doubtedly Acme measure of strong coercion is indispensable.
The debate on this subject was peculiar. Instead of speeches
for and against, it presented rather a consultation upon a
given case, in which each delivered a thesis of his parti-
cular opinions. Never was there a case, in which the dis-
ease has been so confidently and so frequently discovered—
the diagnosis described--the cure pointed out—the doctors so
numerous, including a succession of Chief Secretaries, of va-
rious schools of practice, with tho amateur services of Joseph
Lencaster, and Mr. Owen of Lanark—yet there is Ireland still
in a state of prostrate wretchedness, giving signs of strength only
when roused into a convulsion by the potent skill of Captain
Rock. This is all very strange, and indeed without a precedent
in the annals of civilized Government. We shall only draw
.an inference from it-._ ix, that a course totally different from
any hitherto followed must be adopted—anti we really believe
that there is at present an honest and earnest disposition to do
something of the kind. It was frequently observed during the de-
bate, and it is a gen eral remark, that the condition of the Irish has
become worse and worse since the Union_ The epoch is more cor-
rectly chosen than the event—it should rattier be said since the
rebellion. From the extinction of the hopes, it may be said o#
the race itself, of the Heim of Stuare,-sorne years later than die
middle of the last century, up to the rebellion, the condition of
the mass of the people was rapidly improving. The Catholic
peesantry were no longer suspected of a sympathy, with the
French, Spaniards, or the Pretender, and there was no longer ex-
isting an idol of Popish despotism to which their religion could di.
rect their hopes. There was more union and cordiality between all
classes, and in spite of the tendency of Itomish principles of re-
ligion to make men bad subjects of a free State, by diain-
ing their obedience to a foreign power, the Catholics were
somewhat nationalized, at the same time that the Protestants
became towards them more liberalized. The effect, no doubt,
was greatly promoted by the conquest of its independence by
the Irish Parliament; and by the extension of the elective
franchise to Catholics. It was during this progressive improve.
ment that the French Revolution broke out most disastrously
for Ireland. It was undoubtedly front France that Ireland
caught the flame which lighted up the rebellion.

LAW INTELLFGNCE.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, MAY 14.
BREACH OF THEATRICAL CONTRACT.

It. W. ELLISTON, ESQ. V. WEBSTER.
Mr. Serjeant TADDY stated that this was an action brought
by the plaintiff, not with a view to obtain damages from the
defendant, but merely to shew the persons connected with his
establishment, that whenever they entered into' engagements
they must perform those engagements or take the consequences
of their infraction. The plaintiff was the lessee of Drury-lane
Theatre, and the defendant, one of the performers engaged on
that establishment. After having played some time, he took
it into his head to play the walking gentleman, by walking of
in the middle of the season.

The letters of the defendant in Augus and September, 1820,
and in July, 1821, soliciting an engagement, were put in and
proved.
James Winston, Acting Manager of Drury-lane Theatre,
saw the defendant after the receipt of the letters in the course
of August 1821; witness then told him Mr. Elliston acquiesced
in re-engaging him for the next season at a small advance; the
salary for him and his wife would then be V. bs. a week, it had
previously been only 24 that was for the season of 1821 and 1822;
the salary was playhouse pay, that was paying only when the
house was open. Plaintiffand his wife attended part of that sea-
son. On the 18th of May, 1822, after having received his salary,
he absented himself; he then sent a note, declaring that busi-
ness obliged him to leave town ; he played on that night, but
not afterwards. Witness told the defendant to meet him in
Mr. Elliston's room, which he did. Mr. Elliston then advised
him not to break his engagement, and threatened to enforce it
in a Court of Law. Defendant said he would go, and from
that time to the end of the season he absented himself.
Cross-examined—Did not recollect that the defendant com-
plained of Mr. Elliston's treatment of Mrs. Webster ; was sure
he did not say Mr. E. had taken improper liberties with her; the
season did not usually end in Passion Week ; none of the actors
were at liberty to go at the end of Passion Week, except those
engaged by articles. [A bill was here put into the witness'
hands, dated March 30, and in which that day was stated to be
the end of the season]. The witness said if the performers
went on after that day, they were considered as engaged for
the next season ; the plaintiff continued after that time, and
played until the 18th of the following May.
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN, for the defendant, interrupted the
witness, and observed that every count of the declaration stated
the agreement to be a hiring in October for the then next thea-
trical season. By the evidence the season closed in March,
and that agreement, according to the words of the declaration,
was clearly proved.
Mr. Serjeant TADDY contended that October, as laid in the
declaration, was immaterial, and did not bind the plaintiff to
prove this breach of the engagement during the season then
commencing.
Mr. Justice Bintnounn thought not, but said he would
reserve the point.
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN' requested that his Lordship would
also reserve an objection he had made against the admission of
the letters (to prove the agreement) being stamped.
His Lordship acceded to the Learner} Serjeant's request.—
The plaintiff then called—
Mr. Wilmot, who had lodged in the same house with the
plaintiff in May 1822, to prove that the latter had quitted Drury-
lane Theatre in consequence of entering into an engagement
witn.Mr. Bunn, the Manager of the Birmingham Theatre.
The case for the plaintiff closed here; and
Mr. Justice Bu RO unit having again expressed his opinion
on the objection to the declaration, a verdict was taken for the
plaintiff with nominal damages, subject to a motion on the two
points reserved.