The Sun.
London, England, 1867-06-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JUNE 13, 1867.

offered for the recovery of the coat, and a young
man, tempted by the golden prospect, ventured to
enter the house, but returned almost without suc-
cess and almost suffocated. Recovering his breath,
and animated by the hope of the bright reward in
store for him, he entered, and groping about in
corners wherehe could not see, he was thrilled by the
touch of a coat. The prize was within the young
man's grasp—the sovereign was his. But when he
essayed to pull the coat out, he felt that it con-
tained something much heavier and larger than
a twenty pound note. Dragged to light, it was
found to contain, instead of the coveted paper money,
the senseless body of Mr. James Ede, who had gone
to alarm his brother and his brother's wife and
servant, and in the attempt was almost suffocated.
In the hurry and confusion nobody knew that he
was missing and in danger. As soon as he regained
his consciousness he was sent in a cab to the General
Hospital, as he required treatment not merely for
the exhaustion he suffered, but also for the very
severe wound he had received in the foot when he
fell through the skylight, but which he disregarded
so long as his efforts were necessary for the safety
of others. The fire unroofed the shop and consumed
all the goods. The damage is roughly estimated at
from £BOO to £l,OOO.

fog► £lOO each, and a receipt representing the re-
maining £BOO ; and on going home she placed the
receipt in her husband's box, retaining the £2OO for
present uve. And now Mrs. D- sought to realise
the pleasures of the wealthy. She bought a gold
watch, a chain, and other expensive trinkets, besides
numerous and valuable dresses. Finally, she dis-
appeared. The abstraction of the receipt belonging
to her husband could not be concealed, and when
she saw that affairs were coming to a crisis she went
off, carrying with her the child of her adoption, and
accompanied by a female companion.
The case was then given into the hands of Mr.
Henry Miller, Virginia-street, who at once set to
work in making investigations, and thus it came
about that earnest inquiries by advertisement were
made as to the whereabouts of the missing lady.
After a long-continued and active search, Mr. Miller
succeeded, two or three mornings ago, in appre-
hending Mrs. D- in a small town in the north
of England, whence he brought her back to Glasgow.
The alleged abstraction of her husband's receipt was
a doubtful case for criminal proceedings, nor could
she be dealt with for imposing upon him with the
child, but in causing a breach of the laws relating
to the registration of births to be committed she
rendered herself amenable to a criminal prosecution.
The circumstances were reported to the registrar-
general, who ordered an investigation, which has
resulted in the public prosecutor taking up the case.
We understand that Mrs. D-was examined on
Monday, and committed for trial. Mr. Miller has
' recovered £B5 of the money taken away by the
accused, besides the gold watch and trinkets,
dresses, &c.

the Liberal elected, being senior as a candidate to
his colleague. The borough, therefore, was practi-
cally disfranchised by the candidates themselves ;
and the leaders of parties subsequently agreed that
all future elections at Weymouth should be kept one
and one, in order to avoid the inevitable penalties
to be inflicted by the looming Reform Bill on pec-
cant constituencies. Captain Gridley, for reasons
of his own, is now retiring, and Mr. Edwards steps
into his shoes without a contest, in pursuance of the
compact.—Pall Mall Gazette.

A Ghost Scene.

-

LOIBL AND ANOTHER V. STRAMPFLR.
At the Bail court, yesterday, au action was
brought for an alleged breach of contract relative
to the production of the " Ghost" scene at the de-
fendant's theatre at Vienna. The defendant

pleaded a variety of pleas, amongst others that the
plaintiff had not complied with the terms of the

agreement.

Mr. Sergeant Parry and Mr. Wood were counsel
!or the plaintiffs ; Dr. Kenealy and Mr. Anstey were

counsel for the defendant.

Theplaintiffs are proprietors of the Pavilion Music
Hall in the Haymarket, and are licensers of Diecks
and Pepper's apparatus for producing the well-

known illusion " The Ghost." The defendant is

proprietor of the Imperial and Royal Theatre at
Vienna. In July, 1863, a correspondence took

place between the parties relative to the production

of the illusion in Vienna, which resulted in an
agreement between them, whereby the plaintiffs
were to perform for 14 nights, the defendant gua-

ranteeing the receipts of the theatre should nightly

amount to 3,000 florins, one half of which should be

paid to the plaintiffs. There had been an unsuc-
cessful performance of the ghost at the Joseph
Theatre in Berlin, but Mr. Villiers, the plaintiffs'

agent, subsequently presented it with great satin
faction at the Victoria Theatre in Berlin. It was
about this time the arrangement was come to be-
tween the plaintiffs and the defendant, and the
former account of it was that the defendant was in
no particular hurry, because he was desirous of
bringing out a new piece, " Miss Aurora's Secret,"
in which the ghost was to appear. Defendant,
however, put another piece on the stage without the
ghost (which materially interfered with plaintiffs'
arrangements), which did not succeed. Mr.
Villiers, however, after great trouble and delay, at
last got the stage cut, the glasses fixed, and on the
night of the 15th August there was an undress
successful rehearsal to a practised eye, but the
figures being in black, only the face and hands were
fully shown. Although but one ghost at a time
had up to that period been produced, Mr.
Villiers, at the defendant's request, produced
four, and also made the ghost walk. Defendant,
however, then said he wanted something dif-
ferent, and professed to be displeased, and desired
to change the terms of the agreement. On the 17th
August, the defendant still declining to carry out
the agreement, the plaintiffs put the matter in the
hands of a lawyer in Vienna ; but as it was sup-
posed to be au English contract the proceedings
were stopped, and the plaintiffs then proceeded
against the defendant in this country. Plaintiffs
had been put to about 1100 expenses.
Mr. Villiers, the plaintiff, and other witnesses
were called in support of their case, and denied
there was delay on their part.
The defence was, that in consequence of the great
excitement which the production of a ghost occa-
sioned in 1863 the managers of all the continental
theatres were most anxious to gratify their respec-
tive patrons, and the defendant entered into an
arrangement with plaintiffs. He telegraphed that
the illusion must be presented in the beginning of
August, but instead of that the apparatus did not
arrive until the Bth. A further delay occurred until
the 15th of August, from the plaintiffs not being
able to obtain the glasses and other matters. Every-
thing was then confusion ; the performance was
most unsatisfactory, and the loss to the defendant
had been very great. Plaintiffs knew that several
ghosts would be required to appear at the same
time, but they only made arrangements for the pro-
duction of four. All the persons who saw the re-
hearsal were dissatisfied, and so expressed them-
selves to Mr. Villiers. It was such, they said, as
they dare not present to the public. Evidence was
taken under a commission in Vienna on behalf of
the defendant, which was to the effect that the
plaintiffs had caused great delay, and that the
experiments were unsuccessful, as they could not
produce the ghosts in a complete and perfect form.
It was further contended that the whole affair had
been settled by the Austrian courts, and that the
plaintiffs had no right to proceed against the de-
fendant in this country.
Evidence was then given with reference to the
proceeding taken by the plaintiffs in Austria. A
power of attorney signed by the plaintiffs was put
in, authorising an Austrian advocate to do all acts
for them--to sue, compromise, and stay proceedings.
Proceedings wore commenced, and afterwards
stayed, each party paying his own costs; the effect
of it was that by the Austrian law further proceed-
ings could be taken.
Mr. Justice Lusk said his opinion was that the
contract was an Austrian one, and that according to
the Austrian law proceedings had been stayed, and
that consequently the defendant had proved that
plea.
The court then went into the merits of the case.
The manager of the theatre deposed that in the
play of " Miss Aurora's Secret" six ghosts were to
appear, but the plaintiffs never attempted to produce
more than four. The figures were never perfect.
Witness was one of the ghosts, and was dressed in
a light suit. The persons present expressed great
dissatisfaction at the rehearsal performance.
The jury ultimately returned a verdict for the
defendant.