The Sun.
London, England, 1860-01-23 00:00:00

THE INQUEST.

At 4 o'clock a respectable jury assembled at the
Emigration Depot, in the docks, before Mr. E. Cox-
well, the borough coroner, to inquire into the cause
of the death of William Harrison and Mark Jesse-
lyn Lay. Mr. J. It. Stebbing, justice of the peace,
acted as foreman of the jury.
The jury having performed the melancholy duty
of viewing the bodies and returned to the inquest-
room,

The Coroner briefly addressed them, remarking
that inquiries of that nature were always painful,
more or less limited in its extent, but rarely had
juries so distressing a duty to discharge as that
which they were that day called upon to perform.
They were to inquire into the deaths of two per-
sons, one of whom had obtained a world-wide re-
putation. Captain Harrison was personally un-
known to him, and he would not further detain
them by any remarks beyond requesting them, as
in all other cases, to bestow their best care and at-
tention on the evidence which might be brought
before them, and give their verdict accordingly.
Mr. Robert Eardley Pinhey, chief-officer of the
Indus steamer, was the first witness examined. He
;stated that about-10 o'clock that morning he was
standing on the dock quay, having just left the
ship, which was anchored across the dock entrance;
He saw a long ship's gig rounding the entrance to
the docks, with a lug sail set. It appeared to wit-
ness that the sail was set on the starboard tack,
and he should judge that in the act of lowering the
sail down, the boat jibbed, and capsised over to
starboard. Ho saw several people in the water,
and the boats of the Indus were immediately
lowered and sent to their assistance. It was blow-
ing very hard at the time from the south-west, and
the boat was running right before the wind.
Mr. 11. E Smith, second-officer of the Indus,
was on the quarterdeck, talking to Capt. Weeks,
when he saw a long gigboat running up under a
lug sail. It was blowing very hard, and the boat
appeared to pitch a great deal. It was about high
water. Capt. Weeks called his attention to the
boat, and very soon afterwards she turned over.
She appeared to be rounding the point at the time.
Ile saw several persons isi the water, and two of
the Indus's boats were lowered immediately, and
picked up some of them. He did not know per-
sonally either of the deceased. Every exertion was
made by the people in the boats to save those who
were capsized. He could not say whether the boat
jibbed.
Mr. W. R. Brown, third officer of the Indus,
said he was on the quarterdeck with Capt. Weeks,
and saw the boat coming up the Itchen. She was
on the starboard tack, with the wind right aft.
As she was rounding-to to port she capsised, while
they were in the act of lowering the sails. The
sails jibbed. Two of the steamer's beats were
immediately lowered, and witness went in one of
them. Every exertion was made to save the
lives of the people who were in the water. Four
were picked up in the gig, and one in th 9 jolly-
boat. Another boat picked up one or two others.
He saw Captain Harrison and the doctor strug-
gling in the water, locked in each other's arms.
The doctor was picked up by the gig, and the
jollyboat picked up one whom witness believed
to be Captain Harrison. He appeared quite
dead, and never moved after he was in the boat,
and foamed at the mouth as he lay in the bow of
the boat. He was black in the face. [lt was ex-
plained that the body of Captain Harrison was
picked up by a pilot-boat, and the witness said he
was not certain on the point, but thought it was
the captain in the jolly-boat.] He afterwards saw
the body of Captain Harrison lying in the shed.
Vie did not know Captain Harrison, but saw him
some weeks since on board the Indus. Ho could
not tell how many people were in the boat when
she capsized.

Dr. James Porteous Watson, senior surgeon of
the Great Eastern, who appeared quite recovered
from the effects of the accident, was next sworn.
He stated that the gig left Hythe that morning
about 10 o'clock, with Captain llarrison, Captain
Zay (superintendent purser), Captain Lay's son,
himself, and six of the crew, including the cox-
swain. There was a strong wind blowing from the
southwest. They had a lug sail set, double reefed,
and were rounding before the wind. The boat
carne near to the dock entrance, close to where the
Indus was lying. Captain Harrison was steering,
and the boat did not appear to answer lier helm
very well. The sea was very rough, and the boat
was yawing about. Captain Harrison gave orders
to one of the men to lower away the sail. The boat
was all at once taken aback by an eddy wind, and
turned over. Witness got hold twice of Captain
Harrison in the water. On the first occasion the
captain made a grasp at the boat to right her, but,
instead of that, she went over, keel uppermost.
Witness went under with the captain, and after
they came up he got hold of the bow of the boat,
ith Lay's son jammed between him and the boat

to keep him up. He also had hold of Captain
Harrison at the same time. The captain tried to
get the boat righted again, and his doing so caused
witness to lose his hold, and he was shoved off a
couple of yards. He made a stroke or two, and
got hold of the weather side of the gunwale, and
remained there until he was picked up. As soon
as witness was partially recovered he saw Captain
Harrison, who was lying in the shed, and had him
removed to a place where there was a fire. lie
caused all proper remedies to be applied until Dr.
Wiblin arrived. After he first lost his hold of the
boat he saw no more either of Capt. Harrison or
the boy. When witness was picked up he was be-
numbed and insensible.

At this point of the inquiry Mr. Stebbing, the
foreman of the jury, expressed to 1)r. Watson, on
behalf of the jury, the strong sense they entertained
of the praiseworthy exertions made by him to save
Capt. Harrison and the lad.
The Coroner said he fully concurred in these re-
marks.

Dr. Watson who was much affected, said he only
did what was his duty under the circumstances.
Dr. J. Wiblin, of Southampton, deposed that he
was called on about 11 o'clock that morning to at-
tend the deceased gentleman. He found him lying
in a small shed at the entrance to the docks, appa-
rently dead. Dr. Chapman, surgeon to the Indus,
and ])r. Palk were in attendance upon him, doing
all in their power to restore animation. On wit-
ness's arrival they adopted the most recent and most
approved method of endeavouring to restore anima-
tion in cases of drowning, and patiently tried the
effects of Dr. Marshall Hall's system. Every possi-
ble means, scientific and otherwise, were used, in-
cluding the application of a galvanic battery by Dr.
Pardey, but without producing any effect whatever.
It was a remarkable circumstance that not the least
of any of the usual symptoms produced by galvanism
upon persons after being even a quarter of an hour
or 20 minutes in the water could be produced in this
case, showing that Capt. Harrison must have been
under the water several minutes, and been perfectly
suffocated, or had died from apoplexy. No less than
10 medical gentlemen were present, all vieing with
each other in their endeavours to restore life.
The Coroner said there could be no doubt that
the deceased were both accidentally drowned, and
that it was impossible to attribute blame to any-
body. Much and well deserved praise might, how-
, ever, be given to all those who were so prompt and
energetic in their endeavours to save life, but for
which many others would probably have shared
the fate which had so unhappily befallen Capt. Har-
rison and the youth Lay.
The jury returned a verdict of " Accidental death."
Mr. Stebbing, the foreman, expressing the great ap-
proval of the jury of the promptitude with which
the boats of the Indus, the Dock Company, and the
Fawn pilot cutter bad been taken to the spot ; also
of the valuable and generous aid rendered by the
medical men of the town. The jury were particu-
larly desirous of expressing their deep sorrow at
the loss sustained in the death of Capt. Harrison,
who had greatly endeared himself to the people of
Southampton during his residence there, and who
was justly regarded as an amiable and honourable
gentleman, a kind-hearted and sincere friend, and
a skilful member of his profession.
The Coroner quite concurred in the propriety of
this expression of feeling. It was a loss which the
whole nation would deeply deplore.
The body of the deceased gentleman was removed
the same evening to a residence at Hill, on the out-
skirts of the town, which he had just taken, and on
the occupany of which he was to have entered on
Tuesday next.

L ATV INTELLIGENCE—Tan. 21.

BAIL COURT.
LAVIGNE V. SMITIL

This was an action to recover a sum of money
under the following circumstances :
The declaration alleged that the plaintiff was
engaged by the defendant to play the oboe at cer-
tain places in the provinces at six guineas a week,
and in consideration that he would play for three
guineas a week for two weeks at Drury-lane Theatre,
the defendant promised to employ him to perform in
operatic performances ia Scotland and at Drury-
lane Theatre at six guineas a week. That he did
play for the two weeks, but the defendant had re-
fused to employ him in Scotland and at Drury-lane
Theatre. The defendant pleaded that he did not
promise as alleged.
Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., Mr. Charnock, and Mr.
Griffiths were counsel for the plaintiff ; Mr. Haw-
kins, Q.C., and another learned gentleman were
counsel for the defendant.

Mr. Huddleston, in stating the case to the jury,
said the plaintiff was a gentleman of considerable
musical celebrity, and the defendant was the well-
known spirited lessee of Drury-lane Theatre, and
the action was brought to recover the sum of £3l
10s., under circumstances which the learned counsel
detailed, and which will be found in the following
evidence :

Antonio Lavigne, examined through an inter-
' preter—ln April last I saw Mr. Mapleson, the de-
fendant's agent, who engaged me at a salary of four
guineas per week. I accordingly played at the
theatre, and received my salary there. I saw the
defendant there during the performances, bat he
gave no orders to the orchestra. In July- last I
made an engagement with Mapleson to go into the
country at six guineas per week. A gentleman at
the theatre gave me money for my railway fare,
and the defendant was sometimes with us in the
country. I went on the tour, and performed at
different places for six weeks. Mr. Mapleson's
brother paid me my salary for the defendant. At
Liverpool Mr. Smith was there, and Mapleson,
through Mr. Wells, made me a proposition by which
I should be one week doing nothing, and a fort-
night on half salary. I declined to accept it.
Mapleson said there-Would be a season at Drury-
lane to commence immediately after the tour
through Scotland, and the season would continue
nearly t‘Christmas. I declined to perform again
at Drury-lane for less than six guinea.s, and Mr.
Mapleson replied, "Very well ;" and it was so agreed
upon. The Scotch engagement was to begin on the
24th of August, and th expenses were to be paid
on the 21st for the journey. After this I played at
Drury-lane Theatre, and received a letter, dated 3d
October, from Mapleson, reminding me that the
opera would commence on the next evening. I
attended, and played for two half-weeks. I went to
Drury-lane for my first week's salary, and received
three guineas, and for the text week's I went to
Mapleson's. He was not there. I received three
guineas, but they claimed a commission on the six
week's tour and the two weeks. I objected to allow
it, and afterwards went to Drury-lane for my ex-
penses-lo Scotland. I was told my name was not
on the list, and I did not get my expenses. I wrote
to the defendant the same evening, and posted the
letter myself, in which I expressed my astonish-
ment at having been told by the clerk, after my
having been engaged by Mapleson for Scotland,
that my name was not• on the list. I received no
answer. I then consulted Mr. Levi, an attorney,
who received a letter from the defendant, inquiring
if I was the " Knight of the bow," as he did not
know me. In the afternoon of the Bth November,
when I was prepared to ;o to the theatre, I received
a letter from Mapleson offering me an engagement
for eight performances for six guineas. I took it
to the theatre, showed it to the door-keeper, saying
" no play for the letter." I did play, and the fol-
lowing day Mr. Levi wrote a letter to the defen-
dant, saying I was playing under the original
agreement. I have not received any money since,
because I refused to accept it, as it was not in
accordance with my engagement.
Cross-examined--The season of 1859 was the
first season I had played at Drury-lane. I
began three weeks after the opening of the
season. I played six nights a week to the end
of the season both in the opera and the ballet.
My salary was four guineas per week. Mapleson
spoke to me about the provincial tour before the
end of the opera season. I left for the provinces
three weeks titer the closing of Drury-lane. The
railway fares were paid by the theatre officials.
The performers defray the expenses of their board
and lodgings. We played at 30 towns. Wells
was leader of the band, and chief of the ballet.
When an opera is performed an oboe is necessary.
You may as well cut off the gas as attempt to leave
it out. Laughter.) I believe Mapleson is a
musical agent. I did not epply to him for an en-
gagement in February, 1859. My wife signed
something when Mapleson came to see me at Paris,
and I paid him is. 6d. ; when travelling with Jullien
I had 12 or 15 guineas a-week, and I lived accord-
ingly. I had nothing to do with the defendant
about the engagement. As I am an artist of re-
nown the managers generally address me. I did
not go to Scotland.
Mr. Edward Wells deposed—l am a violinist. I
went on the provincial tour by arrangement with
Mapleson. On the 29th September Mapleson came
to one at Li rerpool, and asked me to inquire of the
gentlemen if they would play two nights at Drury-
lane, and one night at St. James's Hall for half
they were receiving on the tour, and that there was
a probability of three weeks after, and their being
required a fortnight for Scotland. There was also
a probability of two or three weeks at Drury-lane
before Christmas on. their return from Scotland. I
communicated this to the plaintiff through Mr.
Jarrett. He said he would consider the matter,
and on the following day he said in Mr. Jarratt's
presence that he agreed, and that he had seen
Mapleson.
Cross examined—There was no oboe player in the
Scotland tour. We did not get on very well with-
out it. When I asked the plaintiff to accept the
terms, I told him he would be required for Soot-

land. Jarratt did not go to Scotland. Mapleson
did not tell me that the defendant would not take
a band to Scotland. I had heard something of the
kind from some of the members of the orchestra.

Re-examined--The flute played the oboe part in
Scotland.

Mr. Henry Sarratt deposed—l am a horn player.
I heard the plaintiff tell Mapleson that he could not
accept Well's offer of half salaries for Drury-lane,
only for Scotland. Mapleson afterwards said the 1
plaintiff had been paid the same salary as on the
tour. Plaintiff said, " Then I accept it."
Cross-examined—l am not now in the conjuring
line. (Laughter.) lam not the solitary musician
at Frikell's. (Laughter.) The defendant did not
tell that he would not take a band to Scotland.
Nothing was said of getting a band in Edinburgh
or Glasgow. The Scotch tour was merely talked
of casually in July.
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Hawkins addressed the jury for the defen-
dant, and said the more they heard of his arrange-
ments, the more they would admire his conduct.
The defendant had expended £50,000 during the
last year, and, with the exception of this claim, there
was not an outstanding debt. This engagement
had never received his authority, and the plaintiff
must have been mistaken. The question was whe-
ther or not the promise had been made with the de-
fendant's authority. After giving an outline of the
defendant's case, he called
Mr. E. T. Smith—l am the lessee of Drury-lane
Theatre. The opera season terminated in July last.
I had determined to have a provincial tour, and I
instructed Mapleson to make inquiries, report to
me, and that I would make the engagements my-
self. I did not contemplate the Scotch tour till
during the provincial tour, and it was not till the
middle of October that I thought of taking a band
to Scotland. I had taken steps to have a band in
• Scotland. The Scotch tour commenced on the 24th
of October, and terminated early in November.
There was no season contemplated at Drury-lane,
and I was in communication with Jullien for pro-
vincial concerts. I gave no authority to Mapleson
or any other person to make arrangements for
a late season at Drury-lane. I never spoke to the
plaintiff in my life, until he asked me if I should
want them to go to Scotland, when I said, " Cer-
tainly not, I shall not ruin myself. I shall have a
local band, which would save the expense of the
railway fares from London." I never gave Maple-
son authority to engage the plaintiff for Scotland
or a late season at Drury-lane.
Cross-examined—lt was entirely my speculation,
and the engagement of every performer was made
with my knowledge. I did not know the plaintiff
had been engaged as oboe player. I should think
I have 300 or 400 performers now engaged. I was
to receive from the Glasgow manager £l5 a night
for the band and chorus. I was to provide the
band, take two-thirds of the receipts, and pay I:10
a night towards the band. I, however, did take a
band.

Cross-examined—No artiste is employed with-
out my sanction. I paid Lumley £25,000 last year
for artistes.

Mr. Mapleson deposed—l am a musical agent in
the Haymarket. I made cheques and sent them to
the defendant. No engagement was made without
his ganction or authority. lam positive the plain-
tiff has made a mistake relative to what took place
between us. I made no engagement with him for
the Scotch tour or the late season. We got on very
well without the oboe, or at least the Press said so.
Cross-examined—The plaintiff is a principal per-
former. I had authority when in Liverpool to en-
gage the baud for the following week at Drury-
lane.
The learned counsel having replied,
The judge summed up, and
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.
Damages, £3l 10s.