Transcription
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
ASTLEY v. WELDEN.
This was an action for a breach of covenant. The Plaintiff is manager of the Royal Amphitheatre Westminster-bridge, and the Defendant was one of his performers. Upon the trial it appeared that Miss Welden entered into articles with Mr. Astley, by which she bound herself to act in his Theatres in England and Ireland for three years, at a salary of a guinea and a half a week, under a penalty of 200l. and that9 or 10 months after she quarrelled with the manager about the payment of a fine, and went over to the rival Theatre of the Royal Circus. On that occasion Lord Eldon said that the infraction of the articles had been clearly proved, but the was uncertain whether the sum mentioned in them was to be considered as a penalty or as liquidated damages. He therefore directed the Jury so to form their verdict that a new trial might be rendered unnecessary, whatever should be the opinion of the Court. The Jury found a verdict for the Plaintiff for 200l. to stand if the cause was decided to be legal, and for 20l. only if the Court should be of opinion that he was entitled to a compensation merely for the actual damage he had sustained.
Mr. Serjeant SHEPHERD this day moved that judgement be entered up for the 200l. He commented ably upon the law of the case, and shewed that the provisions of the statute of King William did not here apply. The worst consequences would follow, he said, not only to his client, but to every manager throughout the kingdom, if these articles were not to be strictly enforced. The performers of every Theatre might break their engagements with impunity, as they were exactly of the same description with that of Miss Welden. His client did not wish to distress this poor girl, but he did not behave with rigour his other actors would all follow her example, and he would be completely ruined.
