Star.
London, England, 1818-06-16 00:00:00

cast my tate, •

righteous Heaven, Di...
denies, or as tells of state
st lsome,otlispensing equal laws,
femme' struggling for the world's applause:
neighbour, husband, brother, sire, or son,
rry work, areemplisb'd or begun,
ant that, by me, 'llsy holy Will be dale.
When jigs Ambition tempts my soul to rise,
me her proffeed honours to despise ;
chains or poverty await the just,

minions lure me to betray my trust,
thsmcied by wealth, coaled by tyrant might,
me tardily ?wart At vied,

fast my pligkesdfaids, nor stoop to give,
Ingtheild life, At only case to live !

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

/VAT OF KING'S BENCH. Yam IS.
BARNETT O. COVENT-GARDEN THEATRE.
action for work and labour. The declaration
contract between the Plaintiff and the Pro-
Covent-garden Theatre, that Master Bar-
. sing on their stage for two years at a
salary: for the amount of this salary the
was brought. •
. SCARLET?, on the part of the Plaintiff, stated
popularity Master 'Barnett had enjoyed, in con-
of the excellence of his voice, and his skill
• and then called a witness to establish the
made on the part of Master Bartlett with
Covent-Garden Theatre.
3-examination, Mr. GURNEY, for the De-1
asked the witness, if, in the courof of one,
performances, the voice of Master Barnett had
acked; in consequence of which, he was onr
sing again during his engagement. The ii
'as, that the witness was not aware of the fact.
1 ELLENSOROUGH inquired if the defence de-
upon the establishment of this fact ?
GURNEY answered, that he should be able to
distinctly that Master Barnett was not able to
consequence of a defect in his voice.
ELLIENBOROUGH added, that his opinion ma
dly was, that such a defence was not avail.
there was nothing in the contract respecting a
Ts on such a contingency as the Defendants
had happened ; and, on the other hand, if'
Barnett had become one of the finest singers
world, there was no stipulation for an increase
salary.
-;URNILT observed, that he should be able to
, that by the custom of the Theatre, the en-
gagement of a Performer ceased when he became
fulfil his part of the contract.
ELLENBOROUGH said that nothing of that
appeared in the contract, as proved : it was
:onditiona:ly for two years, and the boy had been
fulfil his part of the engagement ; he might
able to scream instead of singing, but if
iendants bad called upon him, he could not
refused.
S.^.tru.Err remarked, that he could prove
e boy was always prepared if his attendance
Theatre had been required ; this was only the
case of an action for work and labour by a
tradesman or a servant : it was not necessary to shew
work done, if it were only to be executed at the
iuisition of the Defendant, and if the Plaintiff was
to perform it when called upon.
Guasre cited a case from 2 East. 145, which
:ought in point: there, if a seaman contracted
from A to B, and back again, and not to re-
wages until he returned to A, if he were
on shore wrongfully at B, he could not main-
action for his wages as for work and labc•ar,
must proceed for the breach of the contract.
LELLassoaotrout admitted that the fonn of
action in this case threw some difficulty in the
would have been better if the Plaintiff had
ted for the breach of contract.
SCARLETT referred to a case in 1 Campb.
support of the form in which the present
was brought.
ELLENBOROUGH cbserved, that both parties',
to be contending for the extreme of justice,
would probably be injustice to one of them :
WAS a middle course which perhaps would
every body, viz.—that some Banister should
named who would ascertain what was really due.
sides assented to this proposal, and a verdict
accordingly taken for the Plaintiff—Damages
subject to a reference.
SKILLET? V. HOWLETT.

was an action brought to recover the amount 1
funeral expenses of the defendant's brother,
was interred by and at the cost of the plaintiff.
GURNEY stated the case to the Jury ; fiom
it appeared, that the plaintiff, who was an
undertaker, residing at Brompton, was applied to
defendant to conduct the funeral of his (d--
(ant's) brother, who died at Chatham in 1813.
first witness called was 'William Skillett, the
iff's son, who stated, that he remembered the
al of the defendant's brother ; all the articles were
urnished:by his father, and the charges were very mo-
- He applied to the defendant for the money:in
1816, and was told, that it should be paid all
part in a short time. Witness, on his cross-
,mination, said, he was not present at any conver-
between his father and defendant relative to
idertaking the management of his (defendant's)
ier's funeral. The defendant did not reach
_lam until the day before the funeral.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH—Then your father had
preparations for the funeral before the arrival,
consequently without the directions of the de-
Jam.
vitness replied in the affirmative; another mourn-
coach had been ordered after the defendant ar-
', He never applied to a Mr. Robertson for the
funeral expenses.
Lord EttEtmonouott—There is 'no proof of the
lefendant having become his brother's administrator;
therefore if he he at all liable for the debt, it must
from his having promised to pay it.
Mr. Jarvis being called, stated, that he knew the
defendant, and remembered his having been present
funeral of the deceased. Witness attended the
funeral at his request, and recollected his giving or-
- to have the grave bricked and arched over.—
defendant also invited other persons to the fune-
Witnel4 saw him pack up some books and

...
) .
111 ' ........,
AN
I Great. It
. I
' 1 Os sodal I
WiissAir,
t.
Or formic
As ncithb
In ram 1
drat sla
Wheafigs
Teach me
Though cl
Though n
1 llamoi d
grill let m
-
Hold fast
f For lapel
. ---------
i COIU
SARNI
1 An =dot
set out a co:
pfietors of (
• nett should
• certain sala
action was 1
Mr. ScAI
1 % the popular
sequence of
in-singing ;
contract ms
Covent-Gai
i In cross•
Pendants, a
of his perfc
not cracker
Ale to sing
swer was, I
Lord Er
pcnded upr
Mr. Gm
skew digit
sing, in co
Lord Et
I decidedly
. able ; ther
cessation c
iusisted ha
Ns - Master Ba
in the wog
in his sala
Mr. Gu
prove, the
gagement
unable to
Lord - I
, kind appe
unconditic
1 I ready to i
be only 2
the Defen
have refu
Mr. S'
that the i
at the Th
ordinary
tradesma
the work
requisitio
ready to
I*. G
f. he thoug
to go fro
cave his
tsrned 01
t tin an a
bathers
Lord ]
tie attic
• way : it
•
proceade
Mr. E
376, in
action w
Lord
seemed I
which w
' • - there w
is
. satisfy e
be own(
Both
i was ACC,
9001. su
This
of the f
who wa
Mr. (
which
underta
. , by the i
fendant
1 2 The 1
plaintiff
funeral
furnishr
derate.
May, l
or in 1
examin
cation 1
tae um
i brother
Chatha
Lorc
made 1
r, and co
ti - fendan
Wit;
ing co;
ris ed.
1
9. funeri
Lon
defend
therefc
be fro'
Mr.
defend
. ) at the
funera
ders tc
f The do
rat 1
7
• - ,
I N,,,
''l/4 sik