Buffalo Bill's Wild West In England (Part 1)

THE AMERICAN EXHIBITION.

The American Exhibition at Earl's-court continues to be one of the most popular of holiday resorts for all classes, and yesterday an immense crowd filled the spacious halls and the prettily-arranged gardens. It need hardly be said, however, that, interesting as the Exhibition itself is, the main attraction for the bulk of the visitors is Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show, the two performances of which must have been witnessed by something like forty thousand spectators. In all respects the Show is as picturesque and romantic as ever, and several new features have been added since Colonel Cody and his cowboys and Indian warriors first began to give the British public an opportunity of seeing some phases of life and adventure in the Far West. The interesting manufacturing processes carried on in the Exhibition were watched with keen curiosity, and full advantage was taken of the ample means of amusement provided in the grounds, the Toboggan Slide and the Switchback Railway being especially well patronised. The bands of the Grenadier Guards, the Royal Artillery, and the St. George's Rifles played at intervals during the day, and, with the attractions of the Fine Art Galleries, the great Diorama of New York Harbour, and the Illuminations at night, visitors had every reason to be satisfied with the entertainment provided for them.

THE WILD WEST IN CHANCERY

In the Chancery Division yesterday, before Mr. Justice Chitty, the hearing of the case of "Garland v. American Exhibition (Limited)," which was adjourned from last Friday, was resumed.

The plantiff, an artist, residing in Eardley-crescent, applied for an interim injunction to restrain the defendants until the trial, or further order, from causing a nuisance of noise or smell. The alleged noise was stated to be caused by the shooting, shouting, &c., during the performance of Buffalo Bill's Wild West entertainment, and to alleged smell by the stabling of horses and buffaloes in the vicinity of plaintiff's residence.

Mr. Rigby, Q.C. (with him Mr. Maclean, Q.C. and Mr. Butcher), for the defendants, resumed their defence, which had only just opened when the court adjourned on Friday. Mr. Rigby read affidavits by the immediate neighbors of the plaintiff, speaking to the insufficiency of the noise to cause any real annoyance, and also commenting on the short duration of the noise, and stating that the behaviour of the Indians and cow-boys was of the most orderly kind and not objectionable, and in every respect contradicting the evidence of the plaintiff. The defendants also produced an affidavit from Mr. L. S. Forbes Winslow, stating the noise from the railway, as heard from plaintiff's premises, was far more injurious and observable than the noise from the shooting. Much amusement was caused by the contradictory statements by two gentlmen living in the same house, one of whom deposed that the noise was an intolerable nuisance, and the other that it could not cause the slightest inconvenience. An address was produced and unrolled in court, signed by 51 out of 75 residents in Eardley-crescent, and 59 out of 70 inhabitants in Philbeach-gardens, and by 592 persons in all. The address stated that the undersigned residents regretted that steps were being taken to put a stop to the performances of the Wild West Exhibition, and that they in no way found the noise caused by the discharge of fire-arms a nuisance, and should regret to have any obstacle put in the way of the Wild West entertainments. The learned counsel for an interlocutory injunction made out in evidence. It had been said during the hearing that the case possibly might be settled by paying for the plaintiff's expenses of removal, say to the seaside. The defendants were not disposed to yield in that way. They were amply solvent, and they would have no onjection to paying a sum of money into court to abide the issue at the trial, and sufficient to cover any expenses to which the plaintiff might be put by having to move or to incur expense. The plaintiff said he had not moved at first because he thought that he might get used to the noise; that showed that it could not have been so intolerable after all. The learned counsel then proceeded to comment on the plaintiff's evidence. With regard to the shot falling in the plantiff's premises, it was admitted that some shot did fall in the plaintiff's studio. He had, however, exaggerated this cause of annoyance, for a small charge of shot in a fowling piece at 220yds. distance was nothing very serious. That such was the case was shown by the circumstances that the plaintiff, being in the line of fire, the defendants had caused the direction of the shooting to be altered, and other persons who were in the line of fire, if any shot reached them at all, made no complain whatever. The fact was that plaintiff had altogether exaggerated his case. As regarded the smell, there were many persons who resided nearer the stables than the plaintiff, and they said they had experienced no inconvenience. The stables were erected subject to the approval of the district surveyor, who had inspected and approved of the buildings. They were erected on the vacant land belonging to the railway, and the defendants had no less right to build stables behind the plaintiff's house than other persons had to build or occupy stables behind Grosvenor-square. His argument was that the plaintiff had shown a case of exaggeration. "The screams of the persons returning from the Exhibition in the imitating the Indians and rattling their sticks against the corrugated iron." (Great laughter.) Such statements as that brought home no responsibility to the degendants, no more than a person could be made responsible for the shriek of a street boy, which was no less terrible than the yell of an Indian and--(laughter)--had to be endured. The defendants of course regretted that persons should be thus annoyed, but the noise was not made by them. The plaintiff had to put up with 40 trains an hour passing his house; of course, that was no reason why he should have to endure other noises, but it was a circumstance on a piece with the exaggeration of the case made by him against the defendants. One would fancy from what the plaintiff told them that the Indians had not had enough of the performace, but were keeping up their yells from morning to night. The learned counsel said that without saying anything about the prospects of the final issue at the trial, he submitted that in evidence used at the present application, the defendants had shown a clear answer to the plaintiff's complaint, which disentitled the plaintiff to success upon his present application. Moreover, if it should be ultimately found at the trial that the plaintiff had suffered damage, his case was not irremediable, but one which could be subject to compensation. On the present interlocutory application the evidence of the independent witnesses was, it was submitted, in favour of the defendants.

Mr. Swinfen Eady, for the plaintiff, in reply, submitted that the defendants were not entitled to inflict a nuisance on their neighbors for the sake of making a profit. It was clear that a substantial nuisance had been created. As for the address which had been produced, when it was remembered how petitions were sometimes prepared, it was submitted that the court would attach no great weight to it as evience. The plaintiff had made a substantial case, and the defendants had only endeavoured to rebut it by evidence of a general ansterotyped character.

Mr. Justice Chitty said that upon the general balance of evidence he should decline to grant an interim injunction, and in weighing the evidence he considered it collectively, as it was impossible to minutely discuss and comment on the affidavits of each witness seperately. He, however, held that there was not such a weight of preponderating evidence as would justify the court in coming to the conclusion that the plaintiff must succeed at the ultimate trial. The plaintiff had no doubt made out a prima facie case, but it was met by a large body of evidence on the other side. It had been said that the defendant's witnesses had in some cases been biased by having received tickets of admission; but he attached no importance to that, for, taking the witnesses as a body, they were quite as much interested in and affected by the existence of a nuisance as was the plaintiff, and his witnesses were equally to be believed. Strange to say, the plaintiff had but one witness from an immediately neighbouring house who supported his complaint, and in that very house a witness of the defendants resided, who told quite a different story. Moreover, the defendants had a great number of witnesses from other houses in the neighbourhood, who said that they were not annoyed. The nuisance complained of was one which could have been ascertained upon the hearing of evidence, and not one which spoke for itself as being an obvious nuisance. The defendants' counsel had offered to pay a sum of money into court, but the parties could not agree as to the amount. He should therefore fix a sum of $100 as enough, and the action could be set down at once for trial and leave obtained to expedite the trial. He should not give the costs of the present application for an interim injunction, but costs would be costs for the action. There was also on the balance of convenience and inconvenience a good reason for not granting an interim injunction--that was, that to decline such an injunction would do less inury to the plaintiff if he should suceed at the trial than to grant it would do to the defendants if the plaintiff ultimately failed at the trial.

"BUFFALO BILL."

A DANGEROUS GAME.

An inquest was held at Paddington Tuesday morning on the body of a boy named Grant, aged eighteen, who met his death while playing with other boys a game known as "Buffalo Bill." Detective - Inspector Bryan, of the F. Division, seated that he had made inquiries, and found that the deceased was playing at a new game that had started since the opening at Kensington of the Wild West show. It was known as Buffalo Bill. The boy who was the "buffalo" had to allow all the other boys to butt him in the stomach, after which all of them ran away and the buffalo gave chase, and the boy whom he caught had to be "buffalo" next. The witness had been unable to find the boys whom the deceased was playing with. One of the house surgeons of St. Mary's Hospital stated that he found that death was due to collapse following peritonitis, caused by severe injury to the abdomen. The coroner said that the game was a dangerous one, and it would be well for boys not to indulge in it. The jury returned a verdict of Accidental death.

LIVELY LETTER FROM BUFFALO BILL.

The San Francisco Argonaut says that Colonel Wil liam Roy, of El Paso, an old friend and comrade of Buffalo Bill, is in receipt of a frank and characteristic letter from the great scout. The letter, which is dated London, 23rd June, is as follows :

My dear Colonel,-It was a genuine pleasant surprise to receive your letter. I have often thought of you, and wondered what had become of you. So glad that you are still on the top of the earth. Well, ever since I got out of the mud-hole in New Orleans things have been coming my way pretty smooth, and I have captured this country from the Queen down, and doing them to the tune of 10,000 dollars a day. Talk about show business, there was never anything like it ever known, and never will be again, and with my European reputation, you can easily guess the business I will do when I get back to my own country. It's pretty hard work with two or three performances a day, and the society racket, receptions, dinners, &c. No man, not even Grant, was received better than your humble servant. I have dined with every one of the royalty, from Albert, Prince of Wales, down, I sometimes wonder if it is the same old Bill Cody, the bullwhacker. Well, colonel, I still wear the same sized hat, and when I make my pile I am coming back to visit the old boys. If you meet any of them tell them I ain't got the big head worth a cent. I am over here for dust. Will be glad to hear from any of them. Write me again.-Your old-time friend,

BILL CODY.

IN the Court of Chancery last Wednesday, before Mr Justice Kekewich, a motion was made on behalf of Mr George Sanger for an order of the Court discharging an order made by his lordship last week committing Mr Sanger for contempt in having failed to carry out an undertaking given by him to Mr Justice Chitty not to use the name of Buffalo Bill or Wild West in such a way as to lead the public to believe that his (Mr. Sanger's) show was the show of Buffalo Bill. Since Wednesday week Mr Sanger had altered his playbill in a way which, he submitted, met with the requirements of the Court. But the plaintiff insisted that the picture which was posted and exhibited by the defendant was an imitation of the plaintiff's, and therefore the undertaking was not complied with, although there was printed round it that the performance had no connection with any other. In reply, it was contended that the defendant was enjoined only against using the words and not the pictures. Mr Justice Kekewich held that the altered programmes were unobjectionable, but that the defendant would issue the pictures at his own risk. He discharged the order for committal. The costs were paid, subject to taxation, the plaintiff undertaking to return any balance of the [British pound]70 paid, if any balance was found on taxation.