Star.
London, England, 1827-12-11 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGGNCE.

ROWS COURTS Ditiesrasa to.
Rostra fins sr ALLIrTUM.
AITIR of the ROLLS on taking his teat, deli.
judgment of the Court in this matter, %%filch,
mer, vighr. on lessens A laboured at violent. It
fiNd by a vendor rf als est.te for the specific
lance of an agreement. The vendee declin .d
the c• ntract on ac, ount of a defect in the bell.
to the Master was directed to ort upon
ind the Mater had declared it w be good.—
, were then taken by the vendee, and in this
mate, was -rgoetl. It apiteerecl that the
the title arose from the form of the deed Linde,
r vendor claimed, the usual clause of a cruel.
is the death of children, not having been in-
There were sevon children entitled as tenants
the property, and four of them had died with-
- suffe.ed any recovery, The question was,
remaining three could execute a proper con-
their own shares as well as of the shares of
.tildren who were dead? His Honour stated,
bad paid much attention to the case, and was
ted to agree with the Master's Report. It was
the intention of the settler, that the surviving
should take the shares of the others who were
cross•rentaindets had been inserted in the
intention, although sufficient as to a will, was
. as to a deed where formal language had in-
reen required. Upon the whole view of the
refore, his Honour was clearly of opinion, that
:eptittas ought to be allowed.
HUN 'uR disposed of nearly all the Petitions on

copied In yesterday's Paper, from a Morning Paper, the
• in Chancery on Satsrday, in which, by mistake, the
kaiddiesea was menttoned instead of the Coroner of

The caw has been repeatedly before the Coon, and
I, our Headers, we suppose, cortected the error ; bet in
, did not, we are anxious to call tbeit attendee to the
ienseut.l

AT KING'S BENCH, Wasmixeraa, Dacesuora to.
Nisi Prlus, before Lord Tameatioas and a Special Jury.
atticLatle O. DUMB AND cinaßS.
:as an action to recover damage, in compenta•
breach of contract. The case had been tried
d the plaintiff obtained a verdict, which was
~eerily set aside, and a new trial granted.
tact/WHAM stated the plaintiff's case, which
in the recollection of most of our readers. Mr.
vas in Dublin in 1825: he received a hirer
Kemble, offering him an engage.
fifty nights at 201. a night, and a benefit. To
Mi. S oclair replied, wit'vut delay,"that he
himself engaged, and added, that he would
early enough to study for the new opera.—
Mr. Sinclair went to Edinburgh, and whilst
received a letterlrons Mr. FA wcett,the acting ma-
ho stated that it was desirable to know what
Sinclair would arrive in Londen, ;bat W. her's
Der Freiscltraz was to be brought out, and
mus,c was extremely difficult, and •would re-
quire considerable study. To this letter Mr. Sinclair
replied that he would arrive in town on the 15th Otto-
ber,artd he actually arrived on the morning of the 16th.
te then discovered that Der Freischutz had been
played two nights, and that Mr. Peat man had been
pot in the character pointed out for him. He informed
Mr. Fawcett, however, of his arrival in town, and
shortly after received notice that the opera of the Ca-
line( was about to be produced, and that lie should
choose hispart. His appearance in the Cabinet was also
announced in the play-bills for several nights before ill
took place. Mr. Sinclair appeared, and actually played
under the engagement for nine nights, for which he re.;
crived 201. a night. A mutual friend Ache late Dit
latchiser)conitnenicated with Mr. Arnold, the Mana-
ger of the English Opera House, who made a very li-
teal offer to Mr. Sinclair; he was willing to accept
it, but upon application being made .to Mr. Kemble, he
replied, that they were going to bring out a new Opt.
net Covent Garden, and that it was impossible to kt
Mr. Sinclair go to the English Opera House. Mr. Sin-
clair, therefore, remained without any other engage.
sent but that with the defendants, until the ends f the
season, during which he performed only nine nights,
is which he received 201. a night. He now claimed the
observance at his contract, which was for fifty nights,
at 201 a night. He submitted that the conduct of the

defendants themselves put the matter beyond all doubt,
tad that Mr. Sinclair, under the contract was entitled
to 201. a night for forty•one nights If the Jury had
laydivubt of this, there was a count containing a pans
ism strait, and it would be for the Jury to say under
that count, to what remuneration a man of Mr. Sin-
diit's celebrity was entitled.
The different letters alluded to in the Counters
statement, and also the evidence of Dr. Kitchirrer on
the la.t trial, owe put in and read as evidence.
The ArinataLe Gaunter., for the defence, addressed
the Jury. The fasts relative to the formation of the
contract were before them. Mr. Sinclair had contrac-ed
In play fifty nights, commencing in a new Opera the first
vat of October. He failed to fulfil his part of the
contract, remain. d in the country, and abandoned h
eugagement with Covent-Garden; was he then entitled
in compensation under a contract which he himself had
violated? The part in the new Opera, which had been
Pupated for him, was given, in consequence of his
Armee, to Mr. Pearman. Where was the injustice s(
that? Were the managers to postpone the Opera be-
cause Mr. Sinclair thought fit to prefer a country en-
gagement to that which he had made with Covent-
linden? He should have been in town two days befose
the outcoming of the Opera, in order to prepare, yet
it did not attire until the middle of October, andefter
the Opera had been produced. Mr. Sinclair failed to
morns his part of the contract. Had he a right to
I till m the managers to perform their part ? Cet tainly
14. Such conduct had no support either in equity, or
salart*comnaon reason. On the same principle that he
larghtrernain away from his duty one fortnight, he
alight also extend ins absence to a mcnth or two months.
Was there airy taw to justify such a violation of his con-
tract? Then' as to the attempt on the fan of the plaintiff
10 construe Mr. Fawcett's letter into a deviation on the
Put of the defendants from their original contract, the
luppotitirn could not stand one moment. Mr. Fawcett,
the stage manager, did not unite the letter in his official
character ; in fact, he had no authority from the Proprie-
tors to change or modify any contract formed by them.
Mr. Fawn. tt's letter was only an act of good nature to-
*Ards Mr. Sinclair,to inform him that the difficulty of this
susic would require some time to study, and wattling
ham of the necessity of coming in time. Mr. Sinclair's
-letter in answer, saying he would be in town on the
156 October, was no satisfaction to the managers. who
wanted him the very first week of the month. The r•
*us nothing in either Mr. Fawcett's private letter, or in
Mr. Ehnclan's answer to it, which could fairly be con•
stored into a waiver of the first engagement on the pint
the Theatre. Then as to the idea that it was neces•
• that the Theatre should gibe Mr. Sinclair notice-•-•
"las it ever before held necessary to minim' a.man
a contract into which be bad, entered? No; the

The MASI
',reed the jo
on a former
was a bill fill
performance
fulfillirg the
A reference
the 01 , ..11d
Exceptint s
shape the m,
detect in the
which the we
in case of th,
carted. The
in tail to the
out having 31
lIINIher the
• veyance of tl
the four chili
that he had
not prepared
'evidently the
children shoe
dead, and a
deed ; but it
insufficient a
variably. her
Case, thrrefo
*the exception
Ha HON
the list.
(We copied
proceeding in
Coroner of Pod
smeesetatre.
conseqbrotty r
we rare did I
loil4tarcenceit.
COURT OF
&tines at Nil
al
This was
tion, for bre
before, d
egneg,,entl.
Mr. Haut
post be in I
Sinclair war
from Mr.
• anent lot fit
this letter ftil
considered I
be in town I
Soon after
o•
there receiwr
nager, who
" day Mr. Str
opera of D
K. that tbe mu
quire consid
replied that
her, arid he
Ile then d
played two
•
pot in the c
Mr. Fewer
• shortly afte
Batt was al
choose his p
s.
announced
• took place.
ender the e
oived 201.
latch leer) •
Eerofthe 1
t▪ eal offer
it, but upon
, b replied, chi
111 • n at Cover
3T
' Mr. Sinclai
p elate, there
lan' went but tl
- season, due
bna lot which I
I •
observance
ev at 201. • ni
defendants
ei sad that fvl
hod to 201. a ni
S • say dqubt
• ' tea wernit
110111•
that count,
cl,it's cele'
The di:
statement,
the la.t tii
The Ar
rem the Jury.
t t
• contract a
_ to play fift
w volt of
ec
• contract,
eagageme
to camper
violated?
rrepared
ea iteence, t
a I& that? We
o tante Mr.
and
flgement
garden ?
theme°
rank le aid no
the Opera
mum I
es. .
and fali os tl
old va•Sucl
Jur
. CI
Adhtrei
• bei Might als
have has tltn
Batt? TI
be on▪ d
- to tonsil
• .
put of tl
toppositi
ream the stage
.""
charade
d • tors to cl
rd Mr.Faa
id, te wards Al
le • • auk w
etelf
ben of t
r . .letter in
"'e' 15th 15th Oct
b,a " wanted
he •
1-air was nod
NI • Mr. Btni
ty,wa• anted it
saga t° ' W the T
Place d
"fy tha
vier acs- whoa w;
A a cc