The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-18 00:00:00

Ctirb Wbition

SUN-OFFICE, Seven o'clock

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
The Court took the new trial paper to-day, but no case o:
any interest came on during the morning.

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS.)
/TTON lIA3IPDEN.
Mr. KELLY moved for a rule to show cause why a criminal
information should not issue against Mr. John Hampden, by
reason of the publication of a letter, tending to provoke a
breach of the peace on the part of a gentlemen of the name
of Mr. Joseph Walter King Eyton. Mr. Eyton was
a private gentleman of fortune, residing at Leamington, in
the county of Warwick • and Mr. Hampden was also a
gentleman of fortune residing in the same place. Some time
before the transactions upon which the present application was
grounded, these two gentlemen became slightly acquainted, and
their acquaintance lasted until the plaintiff had reason to be-
lieve that attempts were being made, on the part of Mr. Hamp-
den, to alienate his wife's affections front him. It was then
gradually discontinued. This effort, however, to break off all
communication between the two families, failed of its intended
effect. When Mr. and Mrs. Eyton walked about the streets of
Leamington, and especially when the latter walked out alone,
Mr. Hampden took every opportunity of dogging her steps from
place to place ; Mr. Hampden also continually presented him-
self before the house, or in the immediate neghbourhood,
endeavouring to attract Mrs. Eyton's attention. Mr. Eyton
at length determined ,to take some steps for his own and his
wife's protection, and he applied to a magistrate, with the in-
tention of exhibiting articles of the peace against the defendant.
The matter was accordingly heard before a highly respectable
magistrate, at whose suggestion Mr. Eyton withdrew all pro-
ceedings, upon Mr. Hampden's pledging his word and honour
as a gentleman to abstain in future from every species of
annoyance towards Mr. and Mrs. Eyton. So far from this,
however having the effect which the plaintiff hoped it would
have, Airs. Eyton was still followed in the streets by Mr.
Hampden in the same way as before. On one occasion,
when Mrs. Eyton was coming out of a shop, the defendant
tried to induce her to enter into conversation, and spoke of
Mr. Eyton in a mast unjustifiable manner; and on her telling
him that she should certainly complain to her husband, he re-
plied that it should cost one of them his life, or in words to that
effect. After this, Mr. Eyton, happening to walk into a
street where Mr. Hampden was pursuing a similar course to-
wards Mrs. Eyton, he charged him with an intention to cor-
rupt his wife, and to alienate her affections. Some
strong expressions passed, and he believed that these
had led to some proceedings in the Ecclesi-
astical Court, in which Mr. Hampden was the com-
plainant. This was the state of things down to the transaction
which had led to the present application. Mr. Eyton, it ap-
peared, had had his portrait:taken by a young artist, at Leaming-
ton, named Black, and, at the instance of the latter, he was in-
duced to request Mr. Reeve, the proprietor of a subscription
library at Leamington, to allow it to hang up in his library ;_not
an uncommon mode with artists of snaking their capabilities
known to the public. Not long after the portrait was hung up
in the library, an anonymous letter was written to Mr. Reeve;
it was dated the 13th of December, 1843. The writer of it
expressed his surprise that he should hang up in his library a
portrait of a gentleman who had allowed himself to be called
" liar " and " coward," without taking any notice of
such an insult. The writer also assured Air. Reeve,
that he expressed the sentiments of many members
of his library, who felt a delicacy in making a more public
avowal of their feelings. Now it appeared from the affidavits,
that on the last occasion when Mr. Eyton and Mr. Hampden
met, the latter did so far forget himself as to apply the term
.6 liar and coward" to Mr. Eyton, and finding that he had
failed to excite a breach of the peace by such means, this letter
was written in the terms which he had stated. It was written
in a highly disguised hand, but the affidavits would leave no
doubt whatever that Mr. Hampden was the author of it. He
was the person who applied the expression " liar and coward"
to Mr. Eyton. He was a subscriber to the library. It was stated
in the letter that a great many other gentlemen besides the
writer himself participated in the feeling there expressed. The
Learned Counsel then referred at length to Mr. Reeve's affi-
davit. It stated that Mr. Hampden, on seeing the picture,
had expressed his disapprobation, but that ao other person had
followed his example ; that Mr. Reeve showed the letter to
the subscribers who were in the library, Mr. Hampden being
present ; that before he placed it in Mr. Hampden's hand, the
latter said, " That is it about the portrait of Eyton ;" and
that, after reading it, Mr. Hampden said it must have been
written by some blackguard who had come in and seen it.
The deponent also detailed conversations between himself and
Mr. Hampden on the same subject. On one occasion
Mr. Hampden said to deponent, "If that fellow," meaning
Mr. Eyton, " comes to your library, I shall withdraw my name
as a subscriber," and he said that many others would do the
same. The deponent concluded by stating that he had seen
John Hampden write, and had seen a great deal of his writing,
and that he verily believed that the letter before referred to
was of the proper handwriting of the defendant. The Learned
Counsel said there were several other affidavits of the same kind.
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS—Take a rule to show cause.
?LANCHE V. HOOPES..
This was an action brought to recover damages against the
plaintiff, who is the proprietor of a theatre at Bath, for repre-
senting a piece called The White Cat, of which the plaintiff
was the author, without his permission, and in opposition to the
statute.
Mr. Platt, Queen's Counsel, and Mr. Charnock, appeared
for the plaintiff, and Mr. Thesiger, Queen's Counsel, for the
defendant.
Mr. PLATT stated the case to the jury. He said he dared say
many of those who were present at the exhibition of the piece in
question, when it was first brought out at Covent-Garden,
probably little expected at that time to be called upon to
decide the present action. If, however, managers would not
do justice t 3 authors they must expect to be assailed by
the arm of thelaw. In the third year of the reign of William the
Fourth an Act of Parliament was passed for the purpose
of protecting dramatic authors against having their pieces per-
formed without their own consent. It was enacted that the
author's right should continue in force during fourteen years,
if he should live so long, and if longer, then for the whole of
his life ; and that every person infringing it would be liable to
the payment of 40s. for each offence, or to the full amount of
benefit arising to others from such representation, or of in-
jury or loss arising to himself. The present suit .was limited
to the 405., which was claimed for no less than ten perform-
ances. Mr. Planche, who was well-known as a dramatic
author, had, amongst other pieces, produced an entertainment
called The White Cat, which was performed at Covent-garden
Theatre, while under the management of Madame Vestris, in
the month of March, 1842. The piece was very popular,
and there was an actress in it whose performance was particu-
larly admired; he meant Miss Marshall, who sustained the
character of The White Cat herself. There was no white cat
like Miss Marshall.—(Laughter.) Wherever she went there
was no manager of a theatre who would not be glad to enlist her
talents for his stage. In the course of a dramatic circuit, this
lady appeared to have arrived at Bath, and Mr. Edward
Hooper, the manager of the Bath Theatre, had the good for-
tune to engage her services. Having done this he took upon
himself, without asking the permission of Mr. Planche, to
announce the performance of The White Cat, and it was per-
formed for a considerable number of nights to the great
delight of the audience, who applauded the performance from
all parts of the house. There could be no objection to the
performance of The White Cat, but then the plaintiff was
entitled to a fair remuneration, and he came there that day
for the purpose of recovering damages for the invasion of his
right. He felt confident that the jury would feel satisfied, after
they had heard the evidence, that the plaintiff was entitled to
their verdict.
Mary Ann Marshall examined by Mr. CHARNOCK—I per-
formed in the year 1842 at Covent Garden Theatre, in a piece
called The White Cat. The theatre was then under the
management of Madame Vestris, Mr. Planche superintended
the production of the piece, and I believe he was the author.
He read it in the green-room, and also attended the rehearsal.
Some alteration was suggested by Madame Vestris, which was
adopted by Mr. Planche. Last year I was engaged to perform
at the Royal Theatre, Bath. That is one of the bills of the
performance (producing a bill). I was engaged for Easter
Monday. We played in the Easter week. The White Cat
was produced on the Saturday night following, it being
Mrs. Hooper's benefit night. I performed in the piece in the
same manner and the same words as at Covent-Garden. It
was not quite so successful as it had been at Covent-garden.
The piece was to have been played on the Monday, but was
reserved for Mrs. Hooper's benefit. It was performed, I
believe, seven nights running, omitting the intermediate Sun-
day. Besides this I should thinkait was afterwards performed
on six separate nights. It was played on the night when
Fanny Ellsler came down.
Cross-examined by Mr. Tirstsioaa--It frequently happens
that the author dues not read his own piece, but gets a friend
to do so. I had a reat deal to do besides mewing. Mr.
Hooper engaged me' by the week. He was represented as the
manager by all persons connected with the theatre. My engage-
ment with him was a verbal one. I played many other parts
besides the White Cat whilst I remained at Bath.
Re-examined by Mr. PLATT—I was paid by the treasurer.
Mr. Hooper first spoke to me about an engagement in the shop
of Mr. Kenneth, who is a theatrical agent in Bow-street, Lon-
don. My brother afterwards went there to settle it. I re-
ceived from the treasurer of the Bath Theatre the sum which
Mr. Hooper agreed to pay.
George Ross Braid, examined by Mr. PLATT—I am a
comedian, and was engaged by Mr. Hooper in the latter
end of 1842. He was the manager of the Bath Theatre, I
performed in " The White Cat." It was acted about ten or
eleven times, and was first produced on Saturday evening, in
Easter week. There were not more than five performances in
each week, and sometimes only four. I was referred by Mr.
Hooper to Mr. Hollingsworth respecting salary. At Bath I
received the salary which had been previously agreed upon.
Cross-examined by Mr. TIIESIGER—I took the part of
" The Minister of the Court of Never-mind," and performed
that throughout.
William Embden,* examined] by Mr.l PLATT, briefly de-
posed that he was the prompter of Covent Garden Theatre
when the White Cat was performed there, and that he consi-
dered Mr. Planchj to be the author.
Examined by Mr. THESIGER—I know a Society called "The
Dramatic Anther? Society,' and I belivee Mr. Planche is a
member of that society. [The Learned Counsel here handed a
book to the witness.] I believe those are the rules of the So-
ciety. lam not aware that Mr. Crowther, the clerk of.the
attorney for the plaintiff, is the secretary of that Society. I
cannot tell whether or not Mr. Planche is aware of this action
being brought. Mr. Shearman'a name is upon my subpoena.
Mr. PLATT—That, my Lord, is the plaintiff's case.
Mr. THESIOER said, his Learned Friend must distinctly
prove the particular nights on which the piece was performed;
at present he had not done so.
His LORDSHIP said that must be left to the jury.
Mr. THESIGER. then quoted the Act of Parliament to show
that the action ought to have been brought in the county of
Somerset, where the offence was alleged to have been com-
mitted.
ills Isoansurr said that that point might be reserved, and
the defendant should have the benefit of whatever objection he
could make on that ground.
Mr. TIIESIGE a then addressed the jury nF
behalf of the de-
ied, that it
de-
fendant. lie said he agreed with his Learnedo
was very desirable that dramatic authors shoulddrn
be
that
protected
against the infringement of their rights, an those
who invaded them, being pirates, ought to receive a pirate's
fate. It was singular, however, that the last
offence
in this case was committed as long ago as the 15th of
Nay, last year, and that the present action was not commencel
until the 24th of November. The jury had, probably, ob-
served," that he had asked whether Mr. Planche was aware of
his name being used in this action. No answer was given.
,Now, ho believed, in fact, that it was the action of
the Dramatic Authors' Society. The secretary of that
Society was a Mr. Crowther, clerk to the plaintiff's attorney,
and it seemed strange that the Society should choose for its
secretary a gentleman who was interested in encouraging liti-
gation. He had very great doubt whether Mr. Planche was
at all aware of this action. The Learned Counsel then re-
ferred
to the rules of the Society, which stated that in order to
obviate the difficulties to which managers would be subjected
by the Act, this Society was established, which brought them
into communication with one recognised agent, and saved
them incalculable trouble and inconvenience; and also that by
arrangement of that Society, managers who were willing to

• M

forward punctually to the Society a monthly fi'e of bills, re-
ceived a conditional permission, enabling them to perform any
drama belonging to a member of the Society, without the delay
of first obtaining that permission in writing, and in almost
every instance with a knowledge of the exact expense to be in-
curred. The Learned Counsel then stated that the defendant
had acted on the footing of that arrangement, and that having
done se, he was astonished at the course which had been pur-
sued. He would call evidence to show that this arrangement
had been considered binding.
The Learned JUDGI said that no evidence which did not go
to prove the author's handwriting consenting to the perform-
ance would satisfy his mind.
Mr. TrIESIGES said he certainly could not prove a written
consent, and must, therefore, after his Lordship's intimation,
decline to call witnesses. Whatever might be the result, he
was glad that an opportunity was afforded to authors and ma-
nagers of judging how far it was safe to trust their interests in
the hands of the Dramatic Authors' Society.
The Learned JUDGE having briefly summed up,
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages 141.,
costs 40s. ,

EXCHEQUER-(THIS DAY).
(Sittings in Banco.)
The Learned Judges met this morning in Lord Denman's
room, and arranged that the following Judges should take the
circuits to which their names are attached :

CIRCUITS OF THE JUDGES, SPRING, 1844.
Home—Lord Denman; Baron Alderson.
Midland—Lord Chief Justice Tindal ; Baron Gurney.
Norfolk—Lord Abing,er ; Justice Patteson.
Oxford—Baron Parke; Justice Coleridge.
Northern—Justice Coltman ; Baron Rolfe.
Western—Justice Wightman ; Justice Cresswell.
North Wales—Justice Williams.
South Wales—Justice Maule.
Chamber Judge—Justice Erskine.
The cases which came before the Court yesterday pre-
sented no features of interest. The arguments in the cases of
" Mason v. Farnell," and " Vaughan v. Lloyd," occupied a
considerable time, and related to technical points, wholly de-
void of public importance.