The Nelson Evening Mail. FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 1874.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume IX, Issue 133, 5 June 1874, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 1874.

Sttoz Mail. — >A telegram has been received by the Postmaster stating that the Alhambra was to leave Wellington for Nelson to-day, and that a supplementary. Suez mail might be fowarded to Melbourne by her. Perseverance . Company. — The meeting of shareholders held last night ; was' adjourned for a week in order to obtain a larger auraber of votes in favor

of winding up tbe Company. A large majority of the shareholders were in favor of it, but they did not represent a sufficient value. The Licence of Counsel. —We take the following from the Australasian: — "The Tichborne trial was gigantic and monstrous in all its aspects. It seemed in its vast scope to have included all of the peculiar features of English law, and to have shown our judicial system in all of its strength and al) of its weakness; and especially in its tiresome, tedious method. One reproach of our courts-— the reckless licence often used by counsel, and the wanton imputations they scatter so. wantonly, was in this case carried to its very extreme limits. The ordinary abuse and infamous insinuation of an Old Bailey practitioner were gentle playfulness compared with the furious malignancy of the blatant Kenealy, and at the end of the trial he received a rebuke from the Lord Chief Justice of England such as haa hardly ever been administered by the Bench to the Bar. Lord Chief Justice Cockburn said, 'There never was in the history of jurisprudence a case in which such an amount of imputation and invective has been heard before, and I sincerely hope there never will be another.' After giving examples, he a^ed, ' Who could conceive it possible^ fchat |Such vile and slanderous imputations could have been brought forward in a court of justice?" It is said tbat the truculent doctor against whom these indignant reproofs were directed, is to be dealt with by the benchers of his inn of court, and, if so, he will, in all likelihood,* i;£ceive adequate justice. There were some circumstances connected with this trial which made it very undesirable tbat the Bench should appear in any degree to limit tbe latitude allowed to the counsel for the defence. There was, also, the fact that should he abuse this freedom tbe Court could, os was done in the charge of the learned judge, draw the attention of tbe proper trib"ua&i,_to tbe conduct of the counsel. ! But he?e, if any truculent barrister { chooses to outrage decency, and use to the utmost his power of bullying and scattering slanderous insinuations against the character of unfortunate witnesses, there is, apparently, no means of calling him to account. We have counsel here who, according, to their i ligbtß and their opportunities, are as foulmouthed as Dr. Kenealy. Our judges in times past have shown far too great leniency to offences of this kind, ! and bave been too ready lo let such conduct pass unnoticed and unreproved. It is to be hoped that the example of ihe Lord Chief Justice of England will not be lost upon them, and that on any such luture occasion tbey will not shrink from holding up an offender dealing in such * vile and slanderous imputations,' to the scorn and indignation that he so justly deserves."