Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

"THE CINGALESE."

ARMY OFFICER'S ACTION AGAINST

MR. EDWARDES.

THE DEFENCE.

Captain Frkijkrick John Fraskr, of tlie Indian army, and until recently aide-de-camp tc the Lieutenant-Governor of Burma, alleges that in its general scheme the well-known musical comedy, "The Cingalee," is an infringement of a play written by himself, to which lie had given the title of "The Hanjiah ; or, the Lotus Girl," and he has accordingly instituted proceedings against- Mr. George Edwardfs, lessee of Daly's Theatre, with the object of obtaining damages and an injunction. The hearing of the action commenced in the King's Bench, before Mr. Justice Darling and a special jury. Many well-known figures in the theatrical world were scattered about the Court. Mr. Bankes (for plaintiff) said that, being a musical comedy, " The Hanjiah" might be divided into four pans. The most important was the general scheme, which included not only the locality and all that was indicated by it. but the character of the main incidents. In addition were the dialogue, the lyrics, or songs, and the music. It was in connection with what- lie called the general scheme that the complaint. in this case arose. He did not suggest that the dialogue, lyrics, or music were the same, but plaintiff did say that his general scheme hud been copied, and that, so far as the dialogue was concerned, it was intentionally altered so as to produce, if possible, something which could not be said to be a slavish copy. At the time he wrote his play Captain Eraser had been some eight years in India. In the meantime he had occupied his leisure to a considerable extent in writing plays and acting as stage manager in connection with amateur theatricals. He met with very considerable success, and determined to write a play which should, if possible, be introduced upon the London stage. He had been more than once to Cashmere, and. being thoroughly acquainted with the local colouring,, he formed the opinion that he could write a successful play with the scene laid in that part of the world. Having done this he came over to England in the early part of 1900. He made

AN APPOINTMENT WITH MR. EDWARDES. That gentleman, however, did aot turn up, and he saw Mr. Malone, the business manager, instead. Captain Eraser submitted to Mr. Malone what was called the " scenario" of the play—that was a short story written by the author indicating the general scheme—and on June 5 he received a letter from Mr. Malone, who wrote: — " Mr. Edwardes thinks the story is too conventional, but he certainly agrees that the locale is good, and from the description I have given him thinks it worth while going into tlie matter." In consequence of suggestions made by Mr. Edwardes at a subsequent interview Mr. Eraser made certain alterations, and on October 15 he saw Mr. Edwardes himself. He read the play to him in the presence of several gentlemen. As the result an agreement, dated October 23, was entered into, whereby Mr. Edwardes was given the exelusive right to produce the piece, he on his part undertaking to put down £100 on the signing of the agreement, to pay £20 per week while the play was being performed at a West End theatre, and half that sum when produced elsewhere. The play was to be staged within two years of January 1, 1901. at a West Kwl London theatre, under a penalty of £300 and the return of the manuscript. Plaintiff's case was that, having entered into the agreement, Mr. Edwardes allowed a gentleman named Tanner to produce. a play which was not only an infringement of plaintiff's copyright, but a breach of an agreement of confidence contained in: the document entered into. Having returned to India, Captain Eraser on more than one occasion sent to Mr. Edwardes photographs of dresses, or people, or scenery which lie thought would be of assistance in bringing out. the play. In July, 1902, Mr? Malon* wrote him that ■ Mr. Edwardes thought the story would have to be " thickened and strengthened," and that he would like to know if there was any possibility of his coming to England, and, if so, when. Mr. Justice Darling: What do you understand by "thickening a story?" (Laughter.) I have heard of the " plot thickening." (Laughter.) Mr. Rufus Isaacs (for defendant): Oh, there is no plot here. Mr. Bankes agreed that there was no plot, but what was exactly meant, by "thickening the story" he did not exactly know. Mr. Justice Darling: Thickening the language? Mr. Bankes had heard of people thickening language or laying it on thickly(laughter) —but what Mr. Malone meant here lie did not know, except that some alterations would have to be made in the dialogue, and possibly in the lyrics. Upon this Captain Fraser wired that he could come to London if Mr. Edwardes would contribute £50 towards the passage money, and Mr. Edwardes having agreed to this. Captain Fraser left India and reached England in the early part of October. Curiously enough he met Mr. Edwardes by accident in the train coming up from Paris, and they discussed t»he matter together. A number of interviews followed between Captain Fraser and and Mr. Huntley Wright, and also with Mr. Edwardes. latter suggesting that plaintiff should collaborate with Mr. Tanner in making any alterations which might be necessary in the dialogue to suit Mr. Wright. Captain Fraser, after some correspondence, gave way. At a subsequent interview with Mr. Tanner Captain Fraser was surprised to hear that gentleman make a remark to the effect that there was nothing legally to prevent him from re-writing the play and retaining the scene and local colouring. Counsel suggested that this clearly indicated Mr. Tanner's state of mind, and EXPLAINED HIS SUBSEQUENT CONDUCT in producing " The Cingalee," which in its general scheme was a pure copy of Captain Eraser's. " Hanjiah." Mr. Bankes pointed out where, it was alleged, Captain Eraser's play had been copied in " The Cingalee." He said one of the characters in Captain Eraser's play was intended to be taken by Mr. Huntley Wright, and it was alleged that Captain Fraser's idea was taken by Mr. Edwardes. one of whose characters spoke "pigeon English of an Indian kind." Counsel pointed out that once the general scheme was settled the writing up of the dialogue became a secondary matter, and when " The Cingalee" was produced it was seen at once that in various particulars the plav was a copy of plaintiff's. One of the incidents of plaintiff's play concerned a harem in Cashmere, but counsel contended in " The Cingalee" the incident was taken bodily to Ceylon, where a Buddhist could not have a harem. His Lordship: If he did he would not only be a Buddhist, but a bigamist. (Laughter.) Counsel did not allege that Mr. Tanner had copied plaintiff's dialogue, but the "bone" was the same. Captain Frederick John Fraser was called, and gave evidence bearing out his counsel's statement. Details of the play, as witness first submitted it to Mr. ICdwardes, were produced in Court, and points of similarity in a scene mentioned. Witness said Mr. Huntley Wright said he did not want to play a native or dialect part. He preferred to play an English one. Witness said hethought he could write up one of one English parts to suit Mr. Huntley Wright, and that he would speak to Mr. Edwardes about it. Mr. Edwardes, when approached, said, " Huntley Wright has got to play what, he is told." (Laughter.) Witness continuing, said, after reading his second version, Mr. Edwardes said in a burst of enthusiasm, It is another * Geisha,', and will go all over the world.

YOU WILL MAKE £10,000." Witness replied, " I shall be very pleased to do so." (Laughter.) Witness agreed to sea Mr. Tanner with a view to collaboration. After eome conversation Mr. Tanner said, "I have had enough of writing up other people's plays, and I am not going to do it any more." He also said, referring to witness' play, "If I wrote a play like this I should keep the scene and the local, colour, ljub T should re-writ® the play altogether:" He mack, th: remark, said witness, in an almost threatening manner. Witness mentioned that he did not desire Mr. Tanner to utilise parts of his play, and Mr. Tannei replied, "I should not be likely to do so, but if I yanted to there is nothing whatever to prevent me." Difficulties arose as to the production ol plaintiff's play, and " The Cingale*" was produced oa March & 1904 Replying to #

letter Mr. Edwardes stated that there was no .resemblance in "The Cingalec" to plaintiff's play, either in the story, plot, or characterisation. Captain Eraser said that in one of his scenes in the- " Hanjiah"' he arranged for a parbora, which was a kind of Buddhist gathering, and it was exactly reproduced in " The Cingalee," only that it was called a durbar. Then, again, in his play, he used the words "Bombay Duck" :is a term of endearment, and in " The .Cingalee" the words occur, " Sell your back hair, old Bombay Duck." (Laughter.) His Lordship: What is a Bombay Duck? Witness: A dried fish. Crossexamined by Mr. Issacs, witness said if the dresses in a country were prettv be did not see why they should not be utilised. His Lordship: He sent photographs and wrote on the back -f one that the really pretty girls would not allow themselves to be photographed. "* Mr. Rufus Isaacs: That is not the experience in this country. (Laughter.) Witness, continuing, said lie did not claim the sole right- to represent an Eastern potentate in musical comedy, but admitted points of similarity between "The Cingalee."' "San Toy." and "The Geisha-."' His Lordship (to Mr. Isaacs): Is your case (lint your client copied Mr. Hall's "Geisha"' and Sir. Morton's "Han Toy." and did not copy plaintiff? Mr. Isaacs: Not- quite that. His Lordship: .He i.- not an original genius like Cervantes. Mr. Isaacs-. No, your lordship. There are certain lines jpon which a play is written. (To witness.) Have you not had £400 from Mr. Edwardes, and £50 for expenses in coming tr- England?— Yes. for the work 1 did, in accordance with the agreement. [A cable was received on March 31, stating that the jury had found for the plaintiff and awarded him £3000 damages.]

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19050429.2.88.15

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12853, 29 April 1905, Page 2 (Supplement)

Word Count
1,732

"THE CINGALESE." New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12853, 29 April 1905, Page 2 (Supplement)

"THE CINGALESE." New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12853, 29 April 1905, Page 2 (Supplement)