The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-05-20
4 BALLET DANCERS SUIT.


VERDICT AGAINST THE KIEALEYs--vALUE OF
PRECEDENCE IN STAGE DANCE
PHILADELPHIA, May 10, 1871
decision reached to-day in q somewhat sngu-
lar tried before Judge Peirco the Court Com
mon Pleas. It was the case Of Margetta Roseri VS.
the Klralfy Brothers, damages for breach
OF contract 10 engage the plaintiff first dancer
at defendants theatre Judge PIERCE this morning
decided in favor OF Mile Roser, awarding her III, 700
damages subject to the reserved point OF law whether
the sum OF 2,O00L mentioned IN the contract
as a penalty for breach must be taken
for liqudated damages beyond which no
award can DO made. The developed great deal
Of information to the pecunary and professional
value drst starr dancer OF her POSITION numcri-
cay the stage, and the loss of dignity she suffers
In her profession unless shc Is allowed TO dance the
last solo In advertisement
Mile. Roserie, by articles OF agreement In writing
made at Paris, October 16. 1876, with the Messrs
Kiralfy Brothers. by their agent M Pcrrier agreed
dance Tor them as 'preDsiere ddnseuse eotie for
tho period OF months CERTAIN renewable the OPP
ton OF the defendants, at salary OF 1,600. gold,
month The defendants advanced the plaintiff .6U0f
on account OF tho salary and also paid her travelling
expenses America. They also agreed to give her a
tions Of the direction. Her engagement to COM
mence eight days after her arrival in New York.
There was stpu also that If either party broke
the clauses the they should pay forfeit of
2O0GL
A QUESTION RANK
Mile. Roscri sent TO Chicago 10 perform by the
Kralfys. Sho announced to dance in the flower
ballet in piece called "Paola, or tho Lucky Star"
In rehcarsng the she found Mile. de Rosa
din.s fr.i ba
piece aud she objected dancei in the ballet unless
she could assigned her what she claimed be
proper position first dancer, TO dance the
last soo 10 Inc P,oee ans ,he Nv
Chicago and he not having arranged the matter to her
satisfaction she proposed to telegraph 10 inc de-
tenants at Philadelphia relative 10 the matter Mr..
Gerson informed her that IT was not necessary Us he
had aIrcaoy done The plaintiff went to her hotel,
In the evening Mr.. Gerson sent 10 the hotel 10 In
quire she would dance that night or not. She sent
a reply that she would dance II she coud have her
proper place assigned 10 her She received no re-
ply to this communication and remained NJ the ho-
lei she did not 50 10 the theatre The next MORN
ing she went 10 the theatre and asked Mr. Gerson
II no had received q despatch IRON tho Messrs. XII
rally. He told ner that she was no longer mem
Der OF the troupe He also sent word TO the hotel
that he would not be responsible Tor the payment OF
her board.
sought The defendants, and was Informed they were
In New York. She called the next day and was IN
formed that they had not yet returned and she wrote
them letter. dated December 1876, informing them
oil the NJ Chicago, and Offering To perform
her with them in good faith and requiring IN
equal compliance therewlth IN good faith on their part
TO letter she received no reply, and on making
further application TO them In person and by counsel
sae in ormed that they had no further need Of
her services
The Judges decision says
..rhe right OF plaintiff 10 recover depends on the
question whether the defendants had the right to dis
charge her Tor her failure 10 dance at The Adephi
Theatre Chicago, on the night OF the 4th OF Deccm-
s.In the agreement made with the agent OF the de-
PENDANTS in Paris Mic. Roseri IS styled premiere dan
III ..y.<. tnn irnet flf
the agreement she was engaged as premiere ddneuse
e.oue.
toite throughout world has the right 10 occupy
the highest place in The ballet; that IN France there
exist absolute; that the name star" Is full
ana the highest position IN the ballet
1.-THE difficulty IN this arose from the TACT that
Mile Roser was assigned or bsieved herself 70 DC
gned, second place TO Mhe dc Rosa who is also
u first class artistic
.The defendants rest their that they did not
assign her a position second to Mle de Rosa but gave
her the lrst position the nower ballet and gave 10
Mile Rosa the first position another and different
advertisement But that II II were as the piaintin
Alleges they had right to do So Mile do Rosa
OF a higher rank than the plaintiff, having been en-
gagged as priDtd bdierind dssofad
'.lhe dssoitd appears 10 have been introduced
into tho ballet from the Italian, aud one OF tho con-
tracts gwen in evidence by defendants describes
tho artistic named III It Primd bderind dssofufd du
Ju rang Frdnciis Stella
Dai,eyna assouid The French term Of ART premier
danseuse eoie descriptive OF atistes OF the same
rank being first star dancers. Tho terms d6sofae
i
intensity the position held by the artiste. do not
und therefore, that Mle Rosari occupied position
IN her profession second 10 Mile do Rosa, but that
they are arts,cs OF tho rank under their con-
tracs OF engagement with tho defendants
..Rcative 10 the positions assigned by Mr.. Gcrson
respectively 10 Tho paint'iI and Nile dc Rosa IN me
ballet at Chicago, Mr. Hucbner, the stage manager Tor
tho defendant at Chicago. testified that Mr. Gerson
directed everything about the performance; that on
Monday morning Mr. Gerson gave him slip OF paper
contai ming the order oil the ballot
"rhat he arranged the ballet pursuant 10 his IN
structons, aud appraised Mile Kosor that she was 70
dance after etoufncur and before dc Rosa Tue hrst
place the place oil honor and the place to which a
premiere dynssase efoe absoiue was entitled, was not
assigned 10 Mile. KoscrI IL was assigned to Nile do
Rosa only. .
the defendants: - Roseric very dIsagreoable posi-
lively refuses appearing with dc Rosa, Hall ana my
| self tried everything
Rosa last ballet Koscr lrst II refuse, consider sho
| broke Contract
| .Nr Gcrson did not communicate this reply IN the
plaintiff VINO WIS awaiting an answer AT the MOTEL A.
clearly his duty 10 do 90 as plantin had oncred
TO telegraph herself but was prevented doing 80 by
Mr. Gerson inlormn her that ne had already done So
IL WINS duty also hch he owed TO the dciendnis AZ
the plainl entitled 10 the reply 10 the telegram,
anu to refuse before he was author zcd 10 consider
that she broken her contract. He did NOT Do 80,
but the next morning informed her thht sue was no
longer member OF tue troupe.
al the reply had been communicated 10 hcr, u sue
was mistaken rs to the position assigned 10 her. ~
would have led 10 an explanation aud possibly cor
rection OF the mistake In any event, as the matter
had been submitted 10 the oelendants she wns emu
tied to know Their reply before she couid be called on
10 incur tho risk Of the loss OF her Contract She
might have preferred to dauco that night or tat week.
under the dubious circumstances o her posiloh
until she could have had further explanations IRON
the defendants rather incur tho RISK Of losing
her contract.
II md, therefore, that the contract was not VIC
lated by tue painful but BY the defendants, uhuer CIT
oumsanccs when did not justify them In putting az
end " IT,