That adverse decision and judgment were based on a technicality,--on a point of law, not on a point of fact. The learned Justice who rendered decision and pronounced judgment did not find that Belasco had failed to prove his contention that, actually, he was in partnership with Klaw & Erlanger, not with Brooks, in presentation of “The Auctioneer.” He found that “parol evidence” could not be held to alter the effect of a written and sealed instrument of engagement. “The rule,” he declared, “allowing parol _proof_ of an undisclosed principal _is limited to simple contracts_, for if the agreement be _a sealed_ one, _only the parties thereto subscribing_ can be held bound.” The question of prime public interest in this case (and it _is_ of prime public interest, because the veracity, reputation and standing of one of the most eminent and influential men in our Theatre are affected by it) is not whether Belasco could, in law, under a strict rule of evidence, _enforce_ against Klaw & Erlanger the contract actually signed by Brooks: the question is whether or not that contract was, _in fact_, signed by Brooks as “a man of straw” for Klaw & Erlanger, and by Belasco under duress. I cannot conceive that any intelligent and judicious person could read the testimony adduced and reach any other conclusion but that Belasco had proved his allegations as to fact. And it seems clear to me that the learned Justice must have felt satisfied that Belasco had proved his case, _as to fact_,--otherwise he would not have been at such pains to argue _in extenso_ the _incompetency_ of such _proof_ under the rule. A FAITHFUL FRIEND:--WARFIELD FOR BELASCO. THE END OF “THE AUCTIONEER.” Warfield’s second season in “The Auctioneer” began, September 8, 1902, at the Hollis Street Theatre, Boston, and lasted for 39 weeks,--closing at the Victoria Theatre, New York, May 30, 1903. 315 performances were given and the net profits were $70,000. His third season began at the Harlem Opera House, New York, September 28. It was in December, 1903, that Brooks applied to Judge David Leventritt for a receiver for “The Auctioneer.” Warfield, then acting in New Orleans, being apprised of this application, declared that he would “not play under the management of Klaw & Erlanger’s representative, a receiver, or any one but David Belasco.” That declaration, being published in the newspaper press, was construed by Judge Leventritt as an attempt on the part of Warfield to coerce the court in the matter of appointing a receiver and,--remarking that if it had not been for what he deemed to be an attempt at coercion he would have been inclined to appoint Belasco as the receiver,--he named W. M. K. Olcott. Warfield thereupon refused to continue acting, his tour was summarily closed, January 10, 1904,--two weeks’ salary being paid by Belasco to the members of the company, in lieu of notice,--and Warfield returned to New York. Before leaving New Orleans he published this statement: