New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-07-10
Opera Company Serves Sum-
mons, Demanding That In
preSario Keep Out of the
Field, as He Agreed.
"GLAD OF IT." HE INSISTS
Admits Contract, but Declares
It Doesn't Keep Him from
Giving Advice-Says if He
Is Barred Corporation
Will Do the Work

The Metropolitan Opera Company,
through its counsel. served a summons
and complaint on Oscar Hammerstein
Yesterday in suit to enjoin him and
his son Arthur from giving grand opera
in New York City before April 26,
1890. in accordance with a contract en-
tered into between the Hammersteins
and Edward T. Stotesbury. of Phila-
delphia.
Mr. Hammerstein, who accepted SER
vice on behalf OF himself and his son.
declared that despite the suit. which
is brought in the Supreme Court. the
successor 10 his Manhattan Opera
House. which is to be known as the
American opera House and is now
building at 5lst street and Lexington
avenue, will open its Coors TO the pub
lie on the evening of November 10 at
S o'clock.
And that will be the beginning Of
a season of grand opera at the Ameri-
twenty-four weeks" he added.
Counsel for the Metropolitan said
that IL any such thing were attempted.
pending the present litigation, a tenn
porary injunction would be asked Tor
restraining the Hammersteins from
opening.
Oscar Hammerstein, who seemed any
thing but worried about the suit.
laughed when he heard this and said:
Il feel absolutely safe and morally
justified in my action"
Glad Suit Is Brought.
He did not deny the accuracy Of that
part of the complaint which alleged
that he empowered his son Arthur 10
bind him TO an agreement not 10 enter
the operate field of Philadelphia, Bos-
ton, Chicago or New York when the
Metropolitan paid something like ST.
100000 for ne Hammersteins' "busi-
ness" But he insists that they did not
purchase his right TO advise any one
else who saw tit TO produce grand
opera in these cities, and, moreover, ne
contends that the contract not only
gave him all the territory outside OF
the four cities mentioned in which he
might produce grad opera. but that
the Metropolitan. by shows in At
lanta and elsewhere, itself violated the
contract.
I'm glad they brought the SILT said
oscar. Il asked them TO bring 1t. 1t
cannot in any manner, shape or form
interfere with my preparation for the
coming opera season, for all my con-
tracts have a clause that empowers
me to transfer them TO corporation.
There is only a remote possibility that
the courts will decree that | must not
be directly or indirectly connected with
grand opera in this city. Chicago, Bos-
ton and Philadelphia. But in any event
the work / started will be continued
perhaps by corporation"
He said that while he was in the field
the Metropolitan lost from 100000 to
100000 annually. but that since his
retirement the Metropolitan had profit
ed 500 600 to $4,000 each season.
That profit" he added with laugh,
"csn only be found in the artistic and
philanthropic ledgers Of the company.
which are not open for inspection
What tho Contract Says.
The papers cite that the plaintiff is
not engaged In opera for financial
profit; that since 1905 it's income has
been less than its operating expenses,
Continued on ffth page seventh column