Untitled

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 1987, 24 January 1907, Page 2

“The Coal King” at llis Majesty’s to-night. 1 Alails despatched from Melbourne via Naples oil 19th December, arrived in London oil 20th January. A very successful sale of furniture was held yesterday by Alessrs. Miller and Craig at the residence of Air. Moss, nea'-lv all lines being cleared. The folloa-ing unclaimed letters lie at the Gisborne Post Office: —A. N. Field. D. Campbell, D. Glennin, H. Jarvis, G. Jones, H. C. Stewart, and Airs AI. Lillie. On our front fiti-ge to-day the subjects are: “London Chat,” “Australia of To-day,” “America’s Black Pioblem,” “Alotoring Adventures,” and on the fourth page “Native Lands ” and “Fiji for the Settlers.” Alossrs Common. Shelton and Co., Limited, announce that their Motu sale of stock a-ill be held on Tuesday, February 19tli, at Mr E. Richardson’s yard. Tho present entries comprise 1000 sheep, and further entries are invited. An ineijntmt fire occurred in a bedroom in the servants’- quarters of the Masonic Hotel on Tuesday night.,Tho glare of a burning curtain was fortunately noticed by Air Tanner on coming out of his shop, and, with assistance, he soon had the flames suppressed.

The local brokers of the New Alpine Gold Mining Company received a telegram stating the list was closing, but the promoters allowed them to reserve 1000 shares for Gisborne until Saturday, but no later. Tho wire stated that the flotation had been most successful. "We have received from Messrs. Common, Shelton and Co., Ltd., a ■very useful little pocket note-book,-in limp morocco covers, with a .selfopening momo. tablet, which ensures the book opening instantly at the page in use.—Messrs. Morrison Bros., Gladstone. Road, have forwarded ns an illustrated booklet of the Sherwin-Williams paints and varnishes, which are warranted as the best on the market. —The first issue of the Singer Almanac, issued by the Singer Manufacturing Co., is to Land. The almanac is a handy book of useful information.- —We acknowledge receipt of a .handsomely-bound blotting pad and calendar from the Australian Alliance Assurance Co., 1 and also a calendar from Ilotts. Advertising Agency. The North British r.ml Mercantile Insurance Company have also favoured us with their calendar for 1907. What wool not any city parson give for tho means of ringing up every member of his congregation by telephone to jog the memories of those who forget to attend hjs ministrations, or to make the little social inquiries that now cost time and shoeleather? This is, however, what three Maori ministers., on the East Coast expect to he able to do .very shortly. The Maoris linving in the districts about East Cape are up-to-datfe people. At their own,expense and bjiiheir own labor they are making telephone wires almost as common and as complicated in their district as spiderwebs. The. -Maori thereabouts wlio has not a talking machine in his own house will soon lie u person of no account. While backblocks settlements of pakehas are bemoaning that they cannot get even one telephone to serve in case of emergency, the East Coast Maori has helped himself to them by the dozen. How is that for ‘‘enterprise ?—Observer.

The Lunacy Department of Victoria struck a very energetic person recently. He had been an inmate of one of the Yarra homes for some time, hut was allowed out on six months’ probation. Tho day before his leave expired, he suddenly conceived tho idea that it would be a good thing to apply in person at the asylum for his discharge. Saddling his mare, he set out and rode from Euroa to Melbourne in 14 hours (over 100 miles). The asylum people refused his discharge, and invited him inside; but he declined, and gave the record-breaker of flic establishment a good spin over the paddocks. He was brought back, .and bis, sturdy little* mare was turned out ill tile grounds A few evenings afterwards, man and mare, found themselves so close that only a tOft. paling fence separated tliem. The temptation was too great, and in a few moments a bare-back horseman was careering on tho road bound for anywhere. This time he landed at Yea, doing the journey (90 miles) that night, with only one short interval of rest. It seems a pity to have to state that the asylum Ijolds him once more.

MAGISTRATE’S COURT. PERRY V. SNOWSILL. ' (Boforo Mr Burton, S.MA Mr Dysnar represented plnintiif, and Mr Coleman tlio defqpdnnt. His Worship delivered judgment in this cuso, as follows: —Tlio plaintiff claims to rocovor from tlio defendant i tho sum of £lB 2s !)d, being the half I cost of a dividing fence between lands | occupied by thorn, situate at Waii inata. Tho lands in question are i bounded by a river. Section 24 of “Tho Policing Act, 1895,” provides that whore a river is on tho boundary of contiguous lands the occupants of such lands may agree upon a line of foiled on either side of such boundary, and if they cannot agree tlio lino of fence shall ho determined b.v tho Magistrate. Plaintiff says that tho lino of fence was agreed upon between them, and that it was arranged that the fence should he erected, and that plaintiff should, find the materials and defendant the labor. Plaintiff further says that in accordance with such agreement lie placed the. posts on the land and waited fur about 12 months, and. as defendant made no attempt to proceed with tlio erection of tho fence, that he saw him and asked him when he was going on with the work, and that defendant then said he. would not do it at all, that plaintiff could not make him. Plaintiff then gave defendant a notice to fence, and, after the necessary lapse of time, proceeded with erection of the fence on the line which plaintiff says that he and defendant had agreed upon. Defendant denies absolutely that ho over agreed to the line on which plaintiff had erected the fence. To enable plaintiff to recover in this action it is necessary that 1 should he satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that the lino of fence was definitely agreed upon between tho parties. Defendant denies most positively that he ever agreed to the present lino of fencing, and tiiat being so, and there being no independent testimony, I am unable to hold that ail agreement to the line has been provided; therefore plaintiff is not entitled to recover from the defendant the half cost of the fence. Plaintiff is therefore lion-suited, hut as defendant stood by and saw the fence being erected on a line which lie says ho did not agree to. without informing the plaintiff that lie objected to it, I shall not allow any costs. i

PERMITTING DRUNKENNESS. ,Joseph Burke, of Gisborne, hotelkeeper, was charged with permitting drunkenness to take place on his licensed premises, the Record Reign Hotel, on the lltli inst. ,

Sydney H. Eddcll, a butcher, of Gisborne, said ho was in the employ of Thomas Goldsmith, on the 11th inst. He went to defendant’s hotel that day and had one or two drinks, a brandy and a port wine. He entered the hotel about half-past ten in the morning, and remained there until 12 o’clock. Ho had no more drink while he was there. He went from the hotel into the town, and returned about twenty past one. Tlis Worship: Did you have any drink while you were in the town? Witness: 1 may have had one or two drinks. Examination continued : I had no drink at all at the defendant’s hotel after I returned. I was all right when I came hack.

The Magistrate: AVhat <lo von moan by that; were you drunk or sober?

Witness: I may have been under the influence, of liquor, but I was not drunk. 1 was arrested at defendant’s hotel at ten minutes to two on the charge of being drunk. After entering the hotel lie remained at the bar until he was arrested. He did not see the licensee during that time. The licensee was not in the bar. The barmaid was there. The licensee’s wife was not there. He remembered Police Sergeant Williams coming into the hotel. At that time witness was sitting on a form in the centre of the bar window. He was then drowsy, but he was not drunk. He was arrested on the charge of drunkenness. Ho was charged with that offence at the court next morning, and pleaded guilty. By Mr Stock, who defended : On leaving the hotel on the lltli inst. he transacted some business in tho town. On returning ho called on Mr Turner, bootmaker. Witness asked him to go into the hotel and have a drink. They both went in. There was a barmaid behind the bar. He asked for liquor, and the barmaid refused to serve him. Mr Turner thereupon walked out without having anything. The barmaid said she thought witness had had enough drink. It was a hot. muggy day. Tho police came in about ten minutes to two. Mr Burke had not been in the bar before the police arrived, but came in soon uftprwards. ' liis Worship: Do you sav you had no more than four glasses that day? Witness: I cannot say. Sergeant Williams: But you have said that you had four. Constable Iloylo deposed to going to defendant’s house on tile day in question, where lie found the last witness sitting on a bench in the bar, and fast asleep. Sergeant Williams came into the hotel also, and defendant was arrested on the charge of drunkenness. Sergeant Williams said: “How long have you been here? The man replied, “About half-an-liour.” The barmaid heard what the mail said. When they were taking the man away the defendant came along and asked what was the matter. Sergeant Williams replied that the man was intoxicated and had been on the premises lmlf-an-liour. Defendant followed them along the passage and asked them if there was anything they wished to see. Sergeant Williams answered, “Ho, nothing,” Defendant said the man could not have been there long, for bo (defendant) h"ad only been to lunch a short time, and lie could not be always there.

By Sergeant Williams: When he went into the hotel ho effort had been jnado to eject the man, who was fast asleep and helplessly drunk, being unable to walk without support. When the man was got to the lockup he fell on to a table twice, 'and had to be held up. ,■ By Mr Stock: The man understood the Sergeant, and answered his question, but his speech was thick. Burke had told witness that he was away at lunch between one and two o’clock, Defendant could not see into the bar from the cjiping room. Sergeant Williams corroborated the statements of the iast witness. Eddell was very drunk. Witness shook him until he roused himself. The man was so drunk that he could not walk. The defendant came in from the outside. Witness said, “1 am taking this man, who is drunk, out of your place.” ' The defendant replied that he had not seen Eddell there. Witness said, “He tells us that he has been here half-an-hour.” Defendant answered, “That’s not true. 1 was away twenty-five minutes.” Witness and the constable had literally to carry Eddell nearly all the way to the lock-up. Mr Mr Stock: He did not hear defendant ask the barmaid whether she had supjilied Eddell with any liquor. This was the case for the prosecution.

Mr Stock, addressing the Court for tile defence, said Mr Justice Edwards had held that it was no offence for a drunken man to be on licensed promises provided lie was not supplied with drink while intoxicated. On the other 'hand. Air Justice Williams had held that it was an offence for a drunken person to he on licensed premises whether lie was supplied with drink or not.lt was-for the . Court of Appeal tp decide between those judges. Mr .Stock proceeded to quote cases. The differences between the judges bad arisen over the word “permit,” It was for his Worship to decide which of the judges correctly represented the law on the matter. The man Eddell had had no drink supplied to him at the hotel when he came in the second time. If the defendant did not know that the drunken man was on the premises, it was at least a plea of extenuating circumstances. When Eddell came in the defendant was away having Jiis lunch, and the barmaid thought she had better wait until Air Burke returned. She did not think there was any harm in allowing the man to remain until defendant returned. He did not think it was necessary to call any evidence. There was only the evidence of Turner and the barmaid, but it did not appear to be necessary to call them. His AYorship said lie thought the defendant was guilty of the offence. He would be fined £5, and 10s costs, and the conviction would be recorded on tlie license.

HOLLOWAY DRAMATIC COMPANY. “TWO .LITTLE VAGABONDS.” STANDING ROOM ONLY. The question is sometimes raised ns to whotlier the public taste for the drama has increased or is on the wane. The ureal; success of the | Charles Holloway Dramatic Company j last night left no shadow of doubt on j that subject as far as the .Gisborne j people are concerned, and when the excellence of the company is so marked. The play last night may bo classed as a splendid success in every respect. The theatre was crowded to the doors, and at an early hour “standing room” only was the order. The work of the authors, George R. Sims and Arthur Shirley, like any othor work has its warm admirers and its keen critics. The death of little Wally at the end of the piece is rather a shock to many who like Ihc summit of happiness to be reached as the curtain falls, with of course punishment or forgiveness for the villains. In the ease of the Little Vagabonds the first scenes produce a good deal of broad comedy, while as the play progresses what humor there is becomes less boisterous, and -the sad story that forms the theme of the plot becomes more in evidence, with the death scone as the climax. Though Miss Beatrice Holloway achieves such a triumph as “Dick,” others have plenty of scope for putting their capabilities to the test, and tiie piece as presented by the Hollovay Company, the piece was nicely balanced throughout, even the minor parts without exception having their individual merit. The plot itself is so well-known that further reference thereto is unnecessary, beyond stating that the cast of charactors did full justice to the authors, and the lmnnting and scenery was very creditable to the management. Miss Beatrice Holloway had a great deal to do in the name pait, and did it well throughout-; it was a fine character, and one of the best scenes was perhaps that in which Mrs. Thornton’s act of kindness leads to the little Vagabond resolving to give up thieving. The character of Miss Thornton was taken by Miss Rosa Conroy, who showed histrionic ability of a high order in the emotional scenes, her finest pourtrayal of the dramatists’ work being in the scene where she realises that the hoy she had just taken to her heart was nob her own son, hut his “pal” Wally, the othor “Little Vagabond.” who was represented by Miss Mabel Russell. That young lady ably uspported Miss Hoilowav, taking the trying part of the dying hoy in a manner that was remarkably clever, the contrast of the ailing lad who had lost his appetite and the brepay, hungry, good-natured Dick, setting off each character with striking effect. Mr. Robert Inman gave a powerful representation of George Thornton, the husband, whose unreasoning jealousy and refusal to believe his wife when she offered an explanation led up to the painful results that formed tlie groundwork of the piece. The scene in which he wrongfully makes cruel accusations against his wife had a thrilling effect on the audience. Mrs. Alice Deorwyn as Barbara Scartli fulfilled the requirements of the character in a most pleasing manner, and Mr. Godfrey Cass was an admirable Captain Dareville. Mr. Jefferson Taite did well the little he had to do as John Scartli. As Bill Mullins. Mr. John P. O’iNTeil made a strong feature of a villainous character, and Miss Pattie Gourlay was equally good as Biddy Mullins. Dido Bunce proved a most comical ruffian in the hands of Mr. John Kesford, while as* the Cough Drop, a Cockney confederate, Mr. Wilton Welch acted cleverly. The other parts were taken as follows: —-Lesson (a soldier servant), Mr. Franklin Kenny; Hargitt (landlcid of “The Chequers”), Mr. George Heather; Dr. Linn, Mr. Jeffrey Williams; Job Gargoyle (a sexton), Mr.. Harrv Brownless; Whiffcn (a village constable). Mr. Max Strathmore; Thomas (a footman), Mr. G. Melville; Sister Randell (a ' hospital nurse), Miss Brendy Burt; Maid to Mrs. Thornton, Miss Florence Willing. Of these the stiff-backed footmen, the pompous constable, and the greybearded sexton helped a good deal in the humorous aspects of the piece. TO-NIGHT’S PROGRAMME. An entire change will be made tonight, when the company will present the up-to-date mining drama, “The Coal King.” The play is said to tell the story ever old and ever new of tlie conflict between vice and virtue with a vim and freshness that make the work stand out head and shoulders over the average melodrama. Tlie hero and heroine are misunderstood, and are persecuted by the villain and the honest people, into whose eyes is thrown dust. The action is brisk and concise. The piece is full of incident and color, and progresses steadily from one scenic triumph to another. Miss Beatrice Holloway lias a part which suits her eminently well. She is admirably supported. Tlie staging and mounting of tlie piece has .received the most careful attention from the thoroughly up-to-date manager, Mr Charles Holloway. ' ‘~p To-morrow night the brief season will be brought to a close, when the thrilling and exciting drama, “The Shadows of a Great City,” will be presented.