Star.
London, England, 1801-12-28 00:00:00

rinsed, and the cday qv: trill had compelled their '
Truflees to bring an ae-thas againft the Proprie-.
toes, upon their covenant, to make them corn-
Isrett- it, if the money railed fliould not be fuffo,
con:, and there had hoe:: a recovery.; what was
to hinder the revertienary interert of Mr. Sher i-
Jlan from being taken in execathsn ? He did nit
toy how this cpreftionmi:..la {land upon argument,
but he mentioned it as another co:olden:ion why.
the parties themfelves fhould take into confider-
ation what was fittelt to. be done, under
circumftances. The next tranfaftion which toot
place was one of a fingular kind. It was the
tranfiraion between Grubb and Sheridan. Grubb
claimed, under an agreement of Auguft ; Sheri-
dian laid, there was none till September, 1795 ;
Grubb infilted he was :t Proprietor, and Sheridan
denied him that charaaer. Whether Grubb was
a partner as to the Theatre or not, there was no
doubt but he was a partner to all the miferable
conlequenees of the concern, and therefore he
was entitled to have an account taken, if not for
j his profit, at leaft for his indemnity. But the in-
tlrument let up by Grubb.was very fingular upon
the face of it. It was now admitted to be wholly
in Richardfon's hand writing, and at the time
I.inley was alive, and no mention was made of
him, but as it appeared by a fubfequent
interli-
neation. The other inftrument of September ad-
mitted by Sheridan was anthurifing Grubb and
Richardfon to manage the Theatre in the abfenee
of Sheridan ; and they were to have one-feventh
each of the profits of management until articles
of co oartnerfliip were executed. He was not
learned enough in the bufinefs of a theatre to Lay
what was the difference between profits of roa-
nagement and profits of the property ; but, how-
ever, there might be filch a difference. The ma-
teriality of this paper feemed alto much to depend
upon a deed cubit:pent, bearing /date the 9th
of April, 1795, made between Sheridan, Adam.
Gmbh, and Holland. It recited the deed of
1793, and the propraitions of 1791, and then al-
igned to Adam, Grubb, and Holland, as Truf-
tees, thirty-feven rent-charges, for the completion
of the buildin-4, the reldue to be paid to She-
ridan. Here was lenders evidence of Grubb's inte-
rea. It might be, that Grubb, being entitled to
one-reventh of the property, would aft fo foolifhly
as to permit Sheridan, in a deed to !which he was
himfelfra party, to .1.. q as the fide proprietor, and
charaflerile himfell as loch in that deed. It was
alfo °Very:able in this deed, that it took no no-
tiee of two coremparary tranfaaions • the fale of
prirate boxes and of annuities. The trolls of
this deed, however, were to complete the origi-
nal fehcrrte : Had it been done ; and had the
money been to applied ? Did he go too far, when
he Owed, that, as the Proprietors flood pledged
to the Duke r f Bedford, and to the rent chargers.
to co nplete the scheme, that a ferious quellion
might he railed upon the condo& of every man,
granting under the deed of 1796. If the pro-
;eft, for which the Prbprietor flood pledged in
17)3, had be.en executed, the Court coal have
railed no que;!inn upon the deeds of 1796, be-
cattle. he agreed, that if that had been accom-
plifhed, Mr. Sheridan might have fold the.pri-
vate boxes, the new rent-charges, and the an-
nuities, for his own rife. But if there remained
duties to be performed, till they were completed
the produce ought net to have been direaed into .
another channel. The other deeds related to the
leafing of private boxes, and granting annuities.
the produce of which were, by the deed of 1793.
a;rplicalde to the fame purpofes. If, therefore,
the money railed by there deeds were by the
Trnilees, or with their privity and confent,applied
to other porpoles, it became a grave and ferious
que:lion for them to confider in what fituation
they flood. On the 24th of December, another
deed was executed between Sheridan on the one
part, and John Role Drew and Hugh Hammerf-
ley on the fccond part. This deed recited the •
former deeds, In that the parties had full notice of
all the trult contained in thofc former deeds. He
need not (late to that Court, that perfons having
fir!..h notice of former trufls as bound the pro-
perry, wire th:npar: anfweraLle if thy appfird ii other.
as jc than as an original Trnflee. The deed went ins
to recite a debt due to Hammerficy of 27091. as a
mortgagee of the Theatre, and alto a further funs
of pool. lately advanced to Mr. Sheridan. Here
aka a grave question arofe—Could this property
be applied to the payment of this debt, the °rig'-
,
nal trolls remaining unfatisfied? This very deed
recited the deed of te93, and he would fay no
more upon it, titan that they who took trufts
an-
I der it, took them with foil notice ht-,w the produce
arifing from the talc of private boxes, annuities.
and rent charger, ought to have beets applied. Ile
ientioned this, not for the purpole of flatting
eew ltilleas of lithorticn, bat as befeeching then
to take Into their Inuit confederation their
own fituations, and make the belt they could of
the acqual flaw of the concern. Having carefully
eviniiled the tirdle of this deed, he had an Sc.
count handed up to him of the application of the
! money. %Vete truft deeds wafte paper, or were
they not ? Ile thoug!Jt the trolleys were bound
to tell the Court why they had fo negligently
executed their lora:, and Mr. Sheridan himlelf
I mull not complain of law expcnces, if he permit-
/ tcd trolls fo to be exeented. But the account did
I ant slop here. Mr. Sheridan had in a letter to
ji,im, Slated that lee woad produce a further at-
, CC:1'1! Lad flint day ha lied in. I
mud here pang: a norrazio, to advert to a praah
fobverive to the 1 t ineiples of Laglith Julliee. I c
rrea:.t not to 41•1-it oirat he laid to Mr. She-
ridan, who threugh the caul,: had given all the
information he coal I. But a praarce had grown
rip ciliate of rinding private letters to the Judge ;
and learee any cattle was tried without his receiv-
ing rue from none quarter or other. It was a
praajee i.e was determined to take tinges
• itron....; Reps to prevent. From tlizfe account.,
tiros ?relented to Lino he was in roil potaliion of
t,le manner how the malty Lad been applied ;
and die only o!,l"crvation 1:e w.11%.1 make upon it
was, t!.a: Ira tee, a:mended it 1,, the truftees—to
t'.e itia chatio I :11,. t 21 ,n-
-r.ft 1 trade:, :!ed ecaneeled w:tlt the deed by
the prior deed 1)3, to cGuider what mil;lst