Untitled

Globe, Volume VI, Issue 654, 25 July 1876, Page 3

The sentence of the Court Martial at Salonica, condemning the Governor of that city to one year’s suspension from office, and other Turkish officers to forty-five days’ imprisonment, has been set aside as insufficient on the representation of France and Germany. The parties are to be tried again at Constantinople. When the case in which Mr William Sincock, late manager of the Land Mortgage Bank of Victoria, was charged with forging and uttering an endorsement of his bank to a bill of exchange for £7OOO was dismissed by the City Bench, Mr Stewart, of Malleson, England, and Stewart, who prosecuted on behalf of the Bank of New Zealand, by whom the bill was discounted, intimated that a fresh charge of having endorsed the bill without lawful authority and with intent to defraud, would be brought against the defendant. Civil actions relative to the same bill had been previously instituted by the Bank of New Zealand against the Land Mortgage Bank, but these were held in abeyance while the proceedings against Mr Siacock were pending. Since tbedecision given by the City Bench on the first charge against Mr Sincock, the Bank of New Zealand has delayed taking any further action, expecting that the Land Mortgage Bank would make some advances with the view of settling the matter out of court. Last week an arrangement was made whereby the Land Mortage Bank released and agreed to transfer Mr Sincock’s shares in the Land Mortgage Bank which were held by the Bank of New Zealand as collateral security for the bill, and in consequence of this the Bank of New Zealand has withdrawn all claims and actions against the Land Mortgage Bank. Mr Joseph Snowball, by whom the bill of exchange was accepted, has purchased the shares referred to, their number being 2687, at £2 10s each, and has given other security to the Bank of New Zealand. It is not probable that any farther proceedings will be taken against Mr Sincock. <• la the new number of the “Church Quarterly Review ” is an admirably-written article,” says the World, “as pungent as it is sensible, on ‘Feminine Fiction ’ The writer is remarkably frank and outspoken, and administers the lash all round without the slightest partiality, fleie are some of his opinions Of Miss Braddon he says, ‘At every step she turns human nature upside down, and outrages every law of human probability.’ And again, ‘The world, as she pictures it, is a world of monsters, who move about in defiance of all outward laws.’ Ouida ‘corrects the mischief which might otherwise be done by her'pictures of brutal passion and debauchery by the rhapsodical extravagance of her style.’ Miss Annie Thomas’s men and women ‘ are a miserable set of creatures, weak and irresolute, and incapable of the slightest selfcontrol.’ ‘Miss Rhoda Broughton ‘exaggerate the vices of Miss Thomas’s style. The mingled coarseness and profanity of this work (‘ Cometh up as a Flower ’) are simply sickening.’ Even Miss Broughton's heroines, however, ‘ are distanced in coarseness and vulgarity by those of Miss Florence Marryat. The hero of “ Mad Du Maresque” is entitled to the palm as the most repulsive blackguard in the whole range of feminine fiction.’ Mrs Edwardes’s novels are ‘ more dangerous because more insidious.’ Mrs Linton ‘ is a writer of undoubted intellectual power, and quite above pandering to vulgar tastes ; but her stories do not afford solace or refreshment. The characters are of a disagreeable, and, if we may use the expression, spiky type ; and there is a tone of bitterness running through her stories which is altogether inconsistent with mental relaxation.’ This is an article to be read,”