New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-04-21
UOURT RBC0RD. X
THURsDAr, APRIL 20, 1876.

Charles T. howard VI. Clifton W. To
leaure.-PetitiOner represents that Cliff
w. Tayleure. who temporarily resides
New Orleans, IL Justly and truly tndebt<
to petitioner in the sum of $lO,O dsmag'
for this, to Wit:
That petitioner 10 and va, ON 4srch z
1875, the lessee of the Varietiee TheAtr
in this city, and ON that date petitioner o.
tered into Q contract with said Tayleur
BY which petitioner appointed said Tayleul
his attorney in fact for tho management
said Varieties Theatre for two successiv
seasons, commencing In November, l67
and assigned to him for that purpose all b
rights and privileges ~ lessee Of sci
theatre; that for and In consideration {
certain sums to be paid to him, said TAI
leure did contract and agree to manage sal
theatre % Q first class theatre, in sccori
ance with its style and repute, oil of who
will more fully appear by reference to sal
contract, which is hereto annexed and mad
part of this petition.
Now petitioner shows that since Novem
Der l, 1875, he has faithfully carried on
and performed oil Of his obligations unde
said contract, but that said Tsyleure ha
wholly failed on his part to manage AMI
conduct said theatre as first class theatre
that said Tayleure has failed to bring on
any stars or other extraordinary attrac
tons 1t said theatre for upward of fvt
| weeks past, and the audiences ut saii
theatre during that time have usually been q
| small - to make the gross receipts less than
500 per night, and the whole management
of said theatre has shown an utter want Of
disposition on the part of said Tsyleure to
carry ont the contract aforesaid.
That the style and reputation Of said Va
rieties Theatre when said contract was
mazda AZ Of chat - 1nAwuv fra
class theatre; that it was tho leading, most
popular and most fashionable theatre in
this city, and that its style and reputation
was that of producing and presenting to it,
frequenters q continual succession of stars
and extraordinary attractions in the the
atrical profession during the whole of the
regular theatrical season, from November
to April inclusive, thereby continually
afording 0 change of entertainment and q
succession of novelties to its patrons, and
attracting to ito performances very large
and reputation of said theatre was well
known to said Tayleure when he entered
into said contract, and he has failed wholly
to carry out said contract and agreement as
set forth, and has neglected to provide for
and to have such q succession of stars or
other novelties Is was and 10 necessary to
keep up and maintain said style and repu.
tation.
Petitioner shows further, that said viola
ton of contract on the part of said Tsy-
leure has greatly damaged and injured Pc
titioner in this, that large sums have had to
be paid by petitioner to keep said theatre
open and to pay it's running expenses, that
would not have been needed had said Tay-
leure faithfully carried ont his contract;
that instead of being . great loser, petit
toner would have made considerable gains
had said Tayleure performed his obligs.
ti0ne, and the compliance of the said
Tayleure with the terms Of his contract re-
sulting % Aforesaid in the almost entire
desertion of said theatre by ito patrons and
the public, have greatly injured the good
name and reputation of said theatre, and
will act prejudicialy to its interests and
that of petitioner with the general public,
and with the stars If the theatrical pro-
fession, tending to prevent them from max
ing contracts to perform at said theatre
during the next season and thereafter, and
for all of these causes petitioner has suf-
fered great damage and injury, which he
which said Tay leure is liable to petitioner.
Petitioner fusther shows that by failure
of said Tayleure to carry out said contract
as agreed BY him, said contract has become
null and abrOgated, but that said Tayleure
persists in declaring his determination to
20 on with his 30 called management of
said theatre during the next season, and
petitioner fears that he will attempt to do
80, and that if said Tayleure were to attempt
to do so it would work irreparable injury to
and that writ of injunction is
necessary to protect petitioners rights in
The premises.
Injunction issued enjoining and prohibit
ing said Tayleure from in any manner act
mo "a manager of said Varieties Theatre
after April g, 1876. Bond fixed at $3.50.
Charles T. Howard vs.. Clifton w. Tay.
says that he lie, and on the
twenty ninth of March, 1875. was, the les
,ee of the Varieties Theatre in this city,
md on that date he entered into . contract |
With Clifton w. Tayleure, who temporarily |
'esides in New Orleans, by which petitioner |
or the management of said Varieties Thea |
re, and assigned to him for that purpose all |
# petitioners rights and privileges ss lessee |
# said theatre, and by said contract it was |
greed that the petitioner should make large |
|dvances to cover expenses; that the re- |
eipts of the business should 60 into the
lands of said Tayleure, and be accounted
or by him, and that the profits of said bust
ess should be divided between petitioner
nd said Tsyleure as provided for in said
Ontract; all of which will more fully ap-
ear by reference to said contract, which is
ereunto annexed and made part hereof.
Now, petitioner further shows that he
as made large advances to said Tayleure
D carry ON the business of said theatre,
nd that considerable sums of money have
ONE into the hands of said Tayleure as
manager aforesaid, from the receipts OF
aid theatre, and that it is the duty of said
ayleure to render an account to petitioner
f said advances and receipts. and of the
&c thno tao. hvpS ooS6 vy1n I
holly neglects and refuses to render such
ccOunt. And petitioner AYERS that he is
formed and believes that such account,
fully rendered by said Tayleure, would
low that said Tayleure has in his hands,
elonging to petitioner, balance due petit
oner of upward of $4,000.
Wherefore petitioner prsys that said Tay-
'ure be cited to appear and answer this
etition, and that after due proceedings had
Q be adjudged and decreed to render an
count of all business between himself and
etitioner, particularly under the contract
ereinbefOre set forth, that he be con-
emned to pay petitioner said sum of $4,000
18th interest and all costs of suit, etc.
City of New Orleans vs.. M. Schwartz q
r0ther, H. s. Bonouski, Abraham and
'dward Alber, Julius Kaufman, AlphonsO
[ay0r and Frank Keller-Suits for
censes and provisional seizures issued in
ach case.
Heath. Pippey & Lara vs. E. F. Her
'ig.-The defendant is ordered to produce
be documents called for, and his bond is
,creased to $1,000.
John Klein e. Co. vs.. same.-.Mandamus
efused and Injunction dismissed.
Henry Kleinhagen Va. A. S. Badger, tax |
ollectOr of the Fourth Observation-Disclosures
lleges the property seized for taxes is
hurch property, and therefore exempt.
Injunction on bond of 500 issued.
Superior Criminal Court.
NFORMATIONS.
Carrying concealed weapons-deorge
tiles, Ben White, Tn. Summerville, Alfred