Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1871.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 18, Issue 1151, 20 October 1871, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1871.

The Rev. R. Taylor will (IXV.) conduct Diyine Service on Sunday next, Oct. 22, as follows :—At Kaikora, at 11 a.m.; at Waipawa, at 3 p.m.; and at Waipukurau at 6 p.m.

We are glad to state that the brig Maggie—which vessel we reported yesterday as being ashoi-e on the boulder jbank—was, at liigh water to-day. successfully floated off. The s.s. Star of the South may now Jje hourly expected to ai-rive here from Auckland. The Hawke's Bay portion pf the European and American mails via California may be expected to reach Napier by this opportunity.

In the Resident Magistrates Court this morning the following cases were heard ; —Bell y. Young.—Claim of £9 4s for rent. —J udgment by default for amount claimed and 16s costs. Lever j. Gebbie.—Claim of £3 4s sd, balance pf account for bread delivered to defendant's order. Defendant disputed an item of ,£1 Is, for which he disclaimed responsibility. There being no evidence but that of the parties interested, his Worship .considering that both bad honafids belief that they were in the right, reserved the case till the other business was disposed of, that it might, if possible, be settled out of Pourt Russell y. Anderson. -A claim of £l2 5s for professional servipes.— Mr Lee appeared for the plaintiff'. Mrs Anderson appeared on behalf of the jiefendant who was unwell, and unable to attend. Dr Russell deposed that a son of the defendant came to him one Sunday, and asked him to accompany and assist Dr Spencer, who was going to amputate his father's leg, which had been fractured. He accompanied Dr Spencer to Meanee, and assisted in the pperafion, after which Dr Spencer informed him, that, having to attend to the troops, he could not give the case the attention it required, and accordingly left it in his hands. Subsequently to this he paid defendant seven yisits, as the case was a serious one, being really a matter of life and death. He charged £5 5a for assisting in the operation, and £1 for each visit, which was a moderate charge. He had received <£J pn account, with which the defendant had been' credited. Mrs Anderson deposed that slie sent her sou for Dr Spencer, and not for Dr Russell. Dr Russell accompanied Dr Spencer, and assisted hlra. Dr Spencer charged £ls. for ihq operation, which she paid gqme weeks after, at intervals. She paid JSI2 iu money, and sent J 2 cwt. of hay, and afterwards the balance, .£l, to Mr Rowing. had been paid to Dr Russell, but she did not intend it for jiim. She considered that Dr Spencer pay him.—Dr Spencer deposed that when defendant's son requested jjiin t(> perform operation he said he

should require an assistant, and asked him to speak to either Dr Tlitchings or Dr Russell. went to Dr Russell, who assisted. Witness, not having time to attend to the case after the operation, left it in Dr Russell's hands, explaining to the defendants that they would have to settle with Dr Russell for the services he had rendered. His own charge was ,£lO for the operation, and £1 Is each for fiye visits. The subsequent attention, which Dr Russell had given, was quite necessary.—Judgment for amount claimed, and Ml 4s costs. Russell v. Dempsey,—Claim of ,£4 4s 9d Defendant admitted the liability, but pleaded a set-off', which, however, he had neglected to file.— Judgment for amount claimed and 9s costs. Palmer v. Bodaan.—Claim of <£3 2s.—Liability admitted.—Judgment for amount claimed, and 9s costs; six weeks allowed for payment. Topping v. Jeffares. A claim of ,£lO 14s lid. — Mr Stedman appeared for defendant.— This was a claim against an assigned estate, plaintiff having omitted to send in his daim, at the proper time.—Nonsuited.

In a recent article advocating the abolition of grand juries, the Wellington Independent thu-s disposes of the argument that in political prosecutions grand juries are a safeguard against the Crown :—" This is a peifect fallacy. A petty jury is drawn by ballot in open Court; a grand jury is secretly struck by the Sheriff, a servant of the Crown. A prisoner has the right to challenge with a petty jury ; he has none with a grand jury. If the Crown prosecutes - -that means now only the Ministry of the day—a grand jury is much more likely to be under their influence than a petty jury ; the former is much move likely to consist of political supporters or of persons who have either received, or are expecting honors or situations from them. Of the two juries the petty is therefore the greatest safeguard Tf the necessity ever arose (and with our free institutions and democratic government it seems almost inconceivable) that the Attorney-General should advise such a prosecution, the accused will find in public opinion a better safeguard against oppression than in a grand jury. 'The days of political prosecutions,' as Mr Mills emphatically writes, ' are gone by.' Why retain an inefficient and cumbrous machinery, whose usefulness, even in past ages, has neyer beeu proved, which is never likely to be required in the ages to come, and whicli prevents the system of petty juries and prosecutions by a public officer having full scope and play i"

A recent number of the London Echo, has the following:—The poor buffaloes of Ceylon exemplify the proveib of " Out of the frying pan into the lire." They object so much to the leeches with which their pastures abound that they come up in great numbers to sleep on the Colombo Hailway, and lie down peacefully on the dry strip between the rails. Of course, the trains at night run over them, and only a jolt tells (he engine-drivei* and passengers that a poor beast has undergone summary execution. Tt is calculated that about. 1000 buffaloes are thus killed in Ceylon. There are we imagine, not a few bull-headed people nearer home who think they can repose in the middle of the way of progress; but only exemplify tie. saying of George Stephenson, that it in '." bad for the coo " to try the experiment.

Mark Lemon mislaid a note. Search was made everywhere for the missing treasure, but it could not be found. I bad burnt some papers, and it was shrewdly suspected that I had swept the note into the fire. Bv-and-bye 1 found a sheet of note-paper, with *< Truly yours, Mark Lemon, ; ' written upon it. "Is this the autograph for the young lady who wrote to you this morning 1 u I asked. " Yes." " Then you have put the .£2O note in the envelope instead of your autograph." V Impossible." I rushed to the bar and was just in time to examine the letters; and, sure enough, as 1 had guessed, I found the note. What would the young lady have thought of Mark demon's reply had she received the other more remarkable autograph which was so near being posted to her?