New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-09-12
THIS TINE MANAGER HILL TINS.
TOMORROW OR NEXT DAY MISS aATHER NAY


SECURE ANOTHER DECISION IN HER FAVOR
1t has been decided by Justice Ingraham IN tn'
spocal term OF the supreme Court that the agreement
OF Margaret Maher the actress now Mrs. HaDerh"Fu'
with James NJ Hill the theatrical manager. Is no'
copatncship as has been claimed by her ana dehica
by him The nature OF the controversy De'"'"l
tben, and the grounds upon which this conclusion ne
been arrived at are set forth In the Judf ophon'
which Wa fled Yesterday. II says in substance
Th. action 4. brought FOR dissolution OF the partner
ship and for an accounting. II claimed nv the pam
~ that the answer admits the copartnershlp but am
satisfied shat such admission The '"mpAh' A.
oge. that the parties entered into copartnershp unne
written agreement which on June T. i-o' =" 'Np''
and that new agreement beginning on June j. lS-' ana
10 exr,re an June 1898 was made The defendant al
,,s that he entered into agreement ana tas
aid agreement continued claimed bur denies h' '
agreement annexed the complaint Is true copy Nh'h
the defendant admitted that he made an agreement DUB
that the agreement in the complaint was nor me
agreement. made between the parties. IL was denial of
the agreement The allegations In the answer do not adj
mt the copsrtnershp, do think that the aR''n'n
was a eopartnershp agreement The hrst contract eN
pressly provides that the relation between the pafe'
should be- Of partners
The agreement sued provides that the plann1
agrees in consideration Of dollar under ne IL
rccon ard mana cement the defendant and al 'n'h
times places during the theatrical seasons a. ~ my
direct that plaintiff Will act no time unner 'n'
anagement OF any other party WITHOUT the c'h-' vi ~
defendant expressed writing. The contract a~o pro-
vides that correct OF the receipts AMI rNp'na
lures shall be kept and shall b. open at al times TO no
inspection OF the plaintiff that he personal expenses 'N-
cept railroad OF each party shall be an ndNau'i
atcr and shall expenses IN th" running
o, the Margaret Mather company. All other expenses -
oulrea In the conducting OF the business sha O" taken
from the receipts and the remaining un' rht,i Do e21a
divided between the defendant and the pa nth There
nothing provision thar would IND ca" the Intention
" Inc parties form coparnership The cN ieht .i
ton compensate the plaintiff Tor her -'i.'s h.al.
ING she together the former CONTRACT on "hca
the question mere continuance the conclusion
Il. Irresistible the agreement not one "i cns-
nership and the plaintiff therefore have D" f'ici ~
this action. The complaint must therefore d. u4smssa
with
The attorney for Miss Mather said 10 a tribune
reporter that she would not appeal nOm ms DECISION
and that effect uf IL would be 10 compei MI mn
70 pay hor the amount ~ The losses NJ me engage'
81 the Union square Theatre. which She ~olld haVs
been compelled to share II had been decided ma.
she was his partner Meantime Justice lawrence
having dissolved the Injunction prohibiting Ter frum
making an engagement with other managers. 81 " -
left at liberty 20 disregard tho agreement with hll
which she claims that he has broken