ADDITIONAL ENGLISH TELEGRAMS.

Grey River Argus, Volume XII, Issue 1182, 13 May 1872, Page 2

ADDITIONAL ENGLISH TELEGRAMS.

; : [PKOM THE ARGUS BXMUL.] The. Rupert, the most powerful iron ram? in ' existence, has been launched at Chatham. ' ■•; '[.'■'* , ..;',';'., ;f ?!> ' The Washington Treaty coßt England ■I 7- --•> '.:■:■ • ,■ "'■'-. .■"'":'• v;.*"' ; The Ballot Bill is under consideration in Committee of the House of Commons, and is expected it will be passed by the Lords. .-: ■' ■;■•■■■ '■•■ ';-" : . "'■■•■• . ■'"■• ; Sir Charles Dilke's motion on the. civil list occasioned a scene of tumult never before witnessed in the House of Commons^ Qlaclstone replied with sarcastic ■ force. "' • ;.-■•: • ■■■'*• .-••?;■:? The Hon. Auberon Hebert, in support* ing the motion, declared himself a Ke--1 publican, which was the signal for tremendous uproar. The House was cleared of strangers. The Bnssiaa Government have resolved to reopen Sebastopol fora mllitaiy aod commercial harbor. / , / • -• ' Oalib,' April 13. . There , were only six hours intervalijetween the arrival of the English mail ana the departure of the Baroda. .-■ The Mahomedan rebellion is causing anxiety. •-■■■ : " ■ Mr Wentworth died on the.2othi^He will be buried at Vanclause, Sydney. - ' l „...„.-.= :- ■- LONWN^Ap^ Duflferin is appointed Govern^ General of Canada. The existence of a secret treaty regarding Canada's independence, in case of a war between England and America^ is officially denied. • ;aiJ " ' Earl Granville's secpbd nptt to America declines', arbitration on the basis of inkd? ; missibility of indirect claims. ' ; The Government has retained tix

did not appear, and a warrant was issued fur his apprehension.

Emily Thompson v. H. Lewis.— A charge of assault and battery, alleged to bo committed at Totara Flat, on the 4th May. The plaintiff, a widow, advertised for a situation as housekeeper. The defendant,' a blacksmith at Totara Flat, wanted some person to look after his hquse, keep his books, and (as he expressed) to "keep him together a^ bit" generally. After the parties were introduced to each other, an agreement was entered into, the exact terms of which transpired further in the day, during the hearing of a civil action for the recovery of wages. The plaintiff said that on the day mentioned she was at her household work, when the defendant came into the house, and in a magisterial manner commanded her to make out a certain account. She did so, but the journeyman blacksmith employed by the defendant detected an error in it. She went to the forge to pass her opinion on the proceedings of the defendant and his man, in impugning the correctness of her book-keeping, when the defendant, after argument, struck her a blow in the face, knocking her down, and she exhibited marks on her face which she said were caused by the defendant's violence. Senior Constable Dorris partly corroborated this part of the plaintiffs evidence. He said that a few hours after the alleged assault was committed, the plaintiff came to him at half- past three to take out a summons against the defendant, and she. bore traces of having been badly injured. The defence was, that when the error in the bill was discovered, the defendant went quietly to the house to get it corrected, and on the mistake being pointed out to the complainant, she flew into a passion, and seizing a wet towel, drove him before her into the smithy, and using at the same the most provoking language. He merely pushed her out of the forge, and she fell. He lifted her up, and enthroned her on a pile of old horse shoes, but she refused to stay there. She made an attempt to go into one of the rooms in the hotel next door, but she, being unsteady in her gait, fell, and struck her face against the doorpost, causing the marks now visible on her countenance. These facts were corroborated by several witnesses. The Magistrate said whatever assault had been committed was provoked by the aggravating conduct of the complainant. Implicit confidence could not be placed in her evidence in consequence of the state she was in at the time of the occurrence, and the episode of the doorpost was sufficient to account for the marks upon her face. The case would be dismissed, with L 2 13s costs. Mr Guinness for plaintiff, Mr Staite for the defendant.

Henry Kane was charged, on remand, with stealing L 9 from the person of George Boyd, at Granville, on 24th April. The prosecutor is a miner, working at Noble's Creek, and the defendant is also a miner, a married man, and keeps a public-house at Granville. On the day named Bond came to Half -Ounce, and, after being about the different townships .all day, he reached Granvillo in the evening. He had, he said, L 25 when he went to the house of the accused. All his money was in Bank of New South Wales notes. He lay down on a sofa and went asleep, but he awoke and noticed the accused in the apartment several times during the night. Tho defendant once or twice shook him, but he requested to be left alone, as he felt unwell. In the morning he was preparing to go to Ahaura with the defendant, according to an arrangement made over night, and on examining his money he found that L 9 in single notes had been abstracted. He counted his money carefully the evening before, but he admitted that he had been on a kind of intermittent spree for the previous eight days. In the morning he reported his loss to the police at Granyille, but he did not particularly accuse any person. — Senior Constable Dorris arrested the accused at Ahaura, and on searching him he found among other monies in his purse nine single notes of the Bank of New South Wales rolled up separately and placed in a different compartment to the other notes contained in the portmonnie. —The defence was confined to testing the credibility of the prosecutor's evidence, and to account for the possession of the particular nine LI notes found in the possession of the accused. — Wm. Lonargan, a storekeeper, at Granville, said that in February last the prosecutor was at Granville, and came to him and accused a publican there of robbing him of Lsor L 6» The witness warned him, about hastily making such charges, and in the course of the day it lU/ned out that the prosecutor had, on the previous evening, given his money to a storekeeper at Granville for safe custody, and the cash was restored to hjm. On thai occasion he narrowly escaped getting a sound thrashing from the man he accused wrongfully of stealing his money. The prosecutor described the manner in which, he said he was robbed in February very circumstantially at the time, and the description was exactly similar to that given by him in the present case. On another, occasion he saw the prosecutor give his wafeh and chain to a person to keep for him, and he (witness) saw him ask the articles from an entirely different person. He (witness) then told him where he would find his watch, and he got it there. He had evidently forgot to whom he gave his watch and chain. The witness further said that the prosecutor had become notorious for accusing people of robbing him when he was on the spree. Hector M'Lean, a blacksmith at Granville, gave similar evidence. John Boland said the accused worked as a wagesman in the mining claim at Duffer Greek. He paid him off jpst before this alleged robbery took place. He received his wages in Bank of New South Wales notes. Thomas Foody corroborated the evidence of the last witness, with whom ho was a partner. This witness and the three preceding ones gave the accused a most excellent character as a hard-working industrious man, and of good reputation. John Hayes, a draper and gold broker at Half-Ounce, said he purchased all the gold coming from Boland and Co.'s claim, in which the defendant was working, and he paid for it in Bank of New South Wales notes. The prosecutor was again called, and closely examined for the defence, but he adhered in substance to his evidence in chief, and flatly contradicted the testimony of the witnesses for the defence. The Court was adjourned. After the adjournment the Magistrate said he had carefully gone over the evidence, and he had come to the conclusion that the case for the prosecution was not sustained. The defendant was therefore discharged, Sergeant

Goodall conducted the prosecution, and Mr Staite defended the accused. CIVIL CASES. Emily Thomson v. Henry Lewis.— A claim of L 4 I.os for nine weeks' wages, at 10s per week. The plaintiff alleged that she engaged with the defendant as a housekeeper, and she continued in his service for nine weeks, when she left in consequence of defendant assaulting her. She was only a week in the situation when defendant wanted to marry her, but she refused until they had a better acquaintance with each other. She was to get 10s per week as pin money, but now she sued for it as wages. They came to Ahaura to get married and made applicar tion in every likely quarter but could not find a person qualified to unite them for better or worse. They were to make another trip in search of some one to marry them, but the quarrel took place in the meantime, and the match was broken off. She broko the engagement, because it was not at all likely she would have anything further to do with the defendant, after his conduct "she'd had enough of him."- The plaintiff appealed to his Worship as to the truth of Her assertion about the search for some one qualified to marry the defendant and herself. The defence was a denial of the agreement, and if it was made that the plaintiff, having the management and control of the defendant's books and cash had amply repaid herself for any trouble she had been at, or for any services rendered by her. The defendant admitted he had honorable intentions towards the plaintiff at first, but he discovered his betrothed was in the habit of going on the rampage, and when she did " there was no standing of her." He did not request the Warden to marry them. His Worship here corrected Mr Guinness who was crossexamining the witness — it was the lady who came to him about the marriage. The witness continued — He came on other business to Ahaura, accompanied by the plaintiff, but when he saw her "skirmishing" about in search of a parson or registrar to marry them, he got home as fast as he could, for by this time certain matters had come to his knowledge which made him determine to get rid of the engagement as soon as possible. The witness entered minutely into a description of the causes of the breaking of the engagement and the consequent quarrel ; but although the case afforded great amusement for the crowded Court, it was pitiful to see two parsons of the age of the litigants make such an exhibition of themselves. A verdict was given for the plaintiff for L 4, with L 4 16s costs.

Gough v. Parker. — A claim of L 6, for rent for the ferry at the Old Ahaura, and for a pair of oars. — Verdict for the plaintiff for L 3 10s with costs.

An application for a re-hearing was granted in White and Garth v. Mrs Jones, in which a verdict was for the plaintiffs by default last Court day. Verdicts for the plaintiffs, with costs, were given in the following cases : — George Muir v. Richard Larkin, L 3 19s 3d; M'Laughlin v. Duke, LI 15s; Methven v. Morgan, LI 3s ; Barman v. Roper, L 7 7s 6d. 0. W, Anderson applied for a midnight license for his hotel and dancing saloon, at Half-Ounce. The police did not object. His Worship refused the application on general grounds. The Court adjourned to 16th May.