The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-03-02 00:00:00

:-:.---e--40urlai the aillaatit orittfMeelbe. or 0
ilk.l doors a the thrttlV,- atilt de‘jfet glitter
in dispose was perfottied at Paris in A•vasiber, 1820,
and that in January 1821, a Gebtieman of the mime
of Amherst was applied to, sad translated the same,
.telidn in consequence of a difference arbiliti between the
pieties, another Gentleman of the same of Metes'
translated it ; and on the 2d February is was advertised
,at the Coburg Theatre,: that dap happening to be the
es•which Therese was Ant performed at Dear/-
lane Theatre, although the affidavit stated that at that
Muse he srarnott aware that smithy* piece .with the'
like name had bees trinslated, and intoned for
pablis represeutsties..
Mr. Ellistan's affidavit mated, that on die 18th of
Jaituary, he retired sear! of the Pesach play, neeseill
Thertree..wlikh Mr. Payne afterwirds trasidistedonali-
lag etas deviations as he ceeesivesl adapted.to stage
repeeesstatien in this country ; is aka stated that Me.ll
tamp assl•atiotheit Gentleman lid Maisie Dests4usrl
Theateeo aid that Me: Elliston had alausateendeshille
Calorrg Theatre, and fiend that tie /Seeds tesit":4
presented there with some slight variatiesi, and tbit;
%thole paseqpnio. •similar to those in the Deary-leoe
Piece. bad beta introduced, but whist wets sot is is
found i••tbe original. . •
Mr. filedsx's affidavit stated be was well aciputiited
with the Genies and French Theatres, and shatillk,
names Istria sae- of I. this piece, were roams*.
iIIeetritSISIENDIEJNO thd Continent, aid idiot !bat' es
the :Nth of January he was applied se, to tiressaffze
the mid pieee; And that he adopted part of tie
maths pet'sonsoof the plaintirs piece.
'Mr: SQUIBS, for the defendants, went into a whoa
compariebn of the Prompter's Books of both the
theatres to. show that they were very+ free translations
from the original, and differed much in many material
points. Upon Mr. Squibb alluding to the passage is
the defendants drama which spoke of " troth lying
on-her lips,"
The Lono CHANCELLOR observed, Mr. Agar wilt
tell us presently how truth can lie on any body's lips.
Mr. Aeas.--Or live either, my lord,
Mr. Soutaa.-1 he expression of truth livieg on
the lips is used by our best writers ; but the idea
of truth lying is a beauty which Mr. Bledex has
culled during his boasted visits to foreign countries.
Mr. Aoaa spoke in behalf of the defendants,
whom he endeavoured to exculpate from the charge
IA copying the tricks and scenes used at any other
theatre.
The Loan CHANCELLOR bad no doubt but that
the 4,:nburg Theatre seeing that the piece had been
swots/lolly introduced at the other House, were
indueed partially to alter the name and take the
same names as were adopted at Drury-Isne.
Mr. PARKER* for the defendants, contended, that
if Mr. Billiton succeeded in his present object, the
Coburg Theatre would never be secure against the
attacks that might hereafter be made upon it, as the
piece in question had actually been translated, and put
into the I.efortners hands for their studying, when the
difference arose between Mr. Amherst and the Pro-
prietors, and which alone prevented,its being brought out
as early as that at Drury-lane, and be contended that all
Dramatic Pieces imported into this cowry, became the
proper y of any one who should choose to translate
them, and they were estitleJ to all the benefit they'
could derive from seeing it performed at other Theaters.
Mr. ELLISTON addressed the Lord Chancellor; he
said be should not have obtruded himself on the at-
tention of the Court but to protest the rights of the
patent property, and not to determine the profits which'
might accrue to himself. He had no objection to the
translations which the minor 'theatres, as they were,
termed, might make ; on the contrary, be was always
glad to see them prosperous: But they should not
come 144.1)4 Theatre, and take away property that cost
Ilies'3oool. to get np. His fortune was embarked in
this Theatre; and was it to be endured that he was to
be at a rent of 10,0001. per annum, and the defendants
not more than 3001. and that they were to come and
take away his property. He called upon his Lordship
to protect him from this innovation; their's was sub-
stantially his piece, in the bones, the blood, the yes-
sels—their's was not a translation; and be called upon
his Lordship to protect the rights of the patent pro-
perty.
Mr. Glossop also addressed his Lordship, and
servtd that he had 30,0091. embarked in the property
he was defending, while Mr. Billiton had lately
brought four informations against bin), which he was
unable to sustain.
The LORD CH•NICIELLOR said it was impossible to
decide the case to day, and should hanu over the
Prompters books to the 'Counsel, for both parties to
examine the difference between the translations, before
he could decide the question.