"DANTE," THE CONJURER.

Otago Witness, Issue 2355, 13 April 1899, Page 47

"DANTE," THE CONJURER.

•ALLEGED BREACH OF AGREEMENT. A TEMPORARY SETTLEMENT EFFECTED. The case in which an injunction is sought against Oscar Eliason, known as Dante, and his wife, Mdlle Edmunda, to restrain them from appearing as conjurer and theatrical perfoimer respectively, and from dealing •with certain paraphernalia and scenery, has been again before the Chief Judge in Equity, Mr Justice A. H. Simpson, at Sydney.

The plaintiff said that an agreement for three years had been entered into between Ihe applicant and respondents at "Vancouver, 8.0., June 2, 1898. Plaintiff had the right lo renew the agreement for a further term of two years, subject to a notice of 30 days. It was part of the contract that the plaintiff win to have absolute control of the defendant's outfit, paraphernalia, scenery, etc. It was set up that the respondents broke the agreement while touring in New Zealand. He said that on Februury 2, while at 'Wanganui, tho respondents declined to perform under his management. Thoy took away the para phcrualia from the hall in which they had been performing, and had since been using it for their own benefit. The plaintiff therefore asked for an injunction to restrain thu respondents from being concerned in any business other than that provided by the agreement. He said he had been put to a great deal of expense in hiring halls for performances in New Zealand which never took place.

Oscar Eliason, in his principal affidavit in reply, asserted 1 that applicant did not pay for halls in Wanganui and Hay/era. He had been informed that the applicant hired- halls in Stratford and in New Plymouth, but had not paid for them, and " from the fact that tho plaintiff left me without any warning, anil took his departure from New Zealand oa February 8, under the assumed name of Prince, I concluded that he went away without paying anybody." The defendant further said that he had frequently to complain to the plaintiff and his wife that they were in the habit of taking cash from people attending this halls without issuing the usual pass tickets ; of showing people into the theatrs past the checktakers ; and of rendering nightly statements on the usual printed forms, showing the receipts and disbursements for the night, which were not properly filled up, inasmuch as they did not Fhow the details necessary to their being checked or tested. Hn had been informed that on January 31 the plaintiff and his wife passed in a number of people to the hall, receiving cash, without the issue of tickets. The nightly statement did not show any cash having been received in this way, or having been, rendered to the ticket office. On the afternoon of February 1, the usual monthly sratepient was handed to him, but it did not contain any record of these cash transaction?. That night he engaged a, man to watch the plainlitt in order lo dee ho\v much cash he took from pertoiiß to whom no tickets were issued. Tho plaintiff having observed this went to him after the perform mice and said, " ' Dante,' we will close our seabon here, and 3lay until you can prove ma a thief." Plaintiff' afterwards said, '"You do not think that I would steal my own money, do you?" Defendant replied, ''But, Curtis, I have proved it." .The plaintiff gave instructions that the luggage was not to be moved forward as had been arranged. Plaintiff next mornincr claimed the luggage fts his, but 'defendant called in a police oflicer, and said the luggage was his. Defendant took it away, but without .force, and stored it in a place in the middle of the town. Thetc goods were his property before ho ertercd into an agreement with the plaintiff. After waiting a day or two the plaintiff did not appear. Then negotiations were entered into between the plaintiff's wife and the de fendant for a rescission of the agreement. Tho defendant was to pay £510, as the amount of the plaintiff's contribution towards certain articles purchased out of tho profits since the tour had commenced. An agreement wan prepared, but then Mrs Curtis said her liurbaud had left Wanganui, and although sho was authorised to act on his behalf she hud no written authority. It was suggested shu *• should telegraph for a power of attorney, but Mrs Curtis said she did not know where 'he had gone. The • defendant subaequentljascertained that tho -plaintiff had left "Waii ganui tinder the assumed name of Prince, and had sailed for Sydney,' via Hobart. Then j it was agreed that the term's of tho Eettlement ! should be carried out, except that the money should be deposited in a bank to be paid over as soon as the proper authority was received | from the plaintiff. The defendant initiated picceedings against "the plaintiff for breach of contract and for (he rescission of such contract. He had, however, been unable to find tho plaintiff until the" 9th inst. Tho defendant mad.c allegations, against the plaintiff's sobriety, and said that in consequence of the plaintiff 'B acts he. .was not now prepared to pay. the £510 referred to. In the course of. further affidavits, the plaintiff produced evidence to show that ha wa3 of strictly sober habits, and always able to attend to his business. He further denied having taken cash at tho doors in the manner described by tho defendant, and said that lie travelled from New Zealand to Sydney in hi« own name. He made counter charges of in1 BGbriety against the male defendant, which 1 were specifically denied. 1 His Honor said they had undoubted authority that a hoiißO divided against itself could not stand, and he thought it was a great pity

tho parties could not come to an agreement to Bettle tho dispute amicably.

After a good deal of negotiation a settlement was effected on the following terms: — Mr H. Skinner was to act as interim manager and receiver, and the expenses shall not exceed ou the average £150 per week. The defendant will give security for the return of half the piofits of the performances from February 2 to March 10 inclusive; half of the profits of future performances to be paid to the plaintiff on his giving security to the satisfaction of the master for their refund in the event of his losing the suit. The defendant is not to tak» the paraphernalia out of the jurisdiction of the court without giving security to the extent of £1000, to the satisfaction of the master ; and he ie to give security not' exceeding £100 for the amount used of £200 worth of printing which had already been ordered. The plaintiff was to give security for the remuneration and expenses of the receiver, tho amount to be settled by the master, in th* e\ont of the parties being unable to agree. The plaintiff to be at liberty to engage in other theatrical performances, provided they do not enter into competition with the defendant. Mr Wkinner was to be at liberty to continue the services of Mr L. J. Lohr as manager, as well as any others at present connected with the company.