New-York tribune., 1875-09-14
SUITS CONCERNING S7AGE-RIGHT.
AUGUSTIN DAILY ENJOINED.

AUGUSTIN DAILY ENJOINED.
JUDGE CURTIS DECIDES FOR TrIR PLAINTIFFS IN
THE "RosE MICHEL sUIT-THE INJUNCTION
CONTINUED.
Judge Curtis IN Superior Court, Special Term,
decided yesterday In favor OF the plaintiffs the motion 10
continue Injunction in the suit by Sheridan shooR ana
A. NJ Palmer to restrain Auglstin DAILY and simmonds
x WALL dramatic agents, from exhibiting the play oi
Rose Michel" in favor OF the plaintiffs The main ques-
on in the s was whether Bayllss the husband OF
Mary Gladstanc an English actress, had acquired any
stageeht for America in the play from lite author OF
had assigned any such right to Mr. DAY. to Smmonds
a. WALL Days cOdefendants The plaintiffs derived
their tile directly from the author II the author
had not parted with his American stageright to Bayss
Mr. Daly presented other points, one that the play
was too immoral for protection by the courts the second
that he had so reconstructed to make Ii his own
Judge Curtis holds that far as shown by the proofs
before him Shook and Palmer have the title to the play
that it Is not so immoral to deprive 1t OF pOtecton
and that II Mr. DAILY has really written an orlgha play
OF the same title injunction against ms playing Ernest
Bums play vii, not hurt him. He therefore maintains
the Injunction. The following Is 'ne op"'" VI ''e'
Curtis In part;
The play was written In French by Ernest Blun. lne
plantfs aege that il has never been pnnh1neu atu ~
that The author sold the original Inansciipt liteoI ~
the French and English languages to one ichaels *io
March H. is sold he same to tg & aS s,nme", , 'e of
the pIains is confirmed by afdavlts OF Micaeis an"
the author. ,.-,n ,o-s ana
The defendants claim that early IN February ls|o one
T. NJ Bayliss purchased the English translation o' the
rIav from Micaeis in Paris and that Baylss employed
ono wall 10 sel for the United states ana tat
me came 10 Nrw-Yo aud sold IL 10 the Defendant Dhy
All parties ronrede that the title was originally 10
Nichaelis The plaintiffs produce bill OF SAFE OF thc
v.o manuscripts from Mchaes to shook, dateu larci
II 1S-5 and ack0wladged April ,, 1879. The defend
onts nrodnce the affidavit of MI wall stating Inc PuF-
chase by avliss Of the English version IN February,
lS75 iii. affidavit fails to show that he was personally
nrrstnt in rars ut the time OF such alleged eac 10
Eayliss or tlat be IN reality had any other
kno ledge as 10 whether suc sale was made eNcpt fioh
y-rt Ipt ss fold him. No affidavit from Baylss II pro
rcot and I'm, statement OF the sale Of the manScrlpt
10 Ba Villas does not appeaI to me 10 he coroOrati ny
any snrmrnts Of other parties having actual knowe edge
nf ay .uch .ar There evidence 10 show thit t.c
drudnnt Day has acted Otherw lse than III g0od faith
I'm purchasing the manuscript from one wall Dut IIoin
roslaraton of all the proofs submitted Oh the nearing
if seems that the weight Of the evidence IA against r
P.Il,s. his representative, Mr. WALL aclihS ioI uc
irrn of simmons * WALL having had any right or e IN
he naulscIint that they undertook to convey TO MI
Dalv From what mas thus far been disclosed must
come tD he conclusion that right III respect 10 ilc
play ras.e,. t0 the defendant DAILY. ,
Amer dsp0sug Of the technical grounds, judge Gurus
ronrddr. Tie defendant, Daly states that pc mas sI,O
sfautidy constructed a and original play IN tne
answer to this application for an injunction Inc author
and his sigecs be they citizens or Aliens, as if s le
lnoull.c-pt and tlar rights therein are concerned are
u-ofrctcd by the law, and these rights cannot e I'm
haired or infringed npOn either directly or indirectly
The injunction is continued during the perdeicy Of the
az iiOn with so costs Of motion to the plalntiii
A. J. Dittenhoe,cr and G. W. Brooke appeared for the
plaintifrs VIM ID. Booth and Thomas W. Clark for the
defendants.