ARRIVED.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XV, Issue 131, 2 June 1880, Page 2

ARRIVED.

June 2, steamer Kennedy, 136, Dillon, from Wellington. Passengers : Messrs Coates, Mansorl, Kennedy, Kruse, Robinson, and 1 Chinaman. 1, k*teh Prospect, 21, Westrupp, from Feiorus Sound. SAILED. Juno 1, steamer Murray, 78, Conway, for Wanganui. — cutler Maid of Italy, 15, Clarke, for Biwaka

The Lady B&rkly leaves on her usual ■weekly trip to Golden Bay at 1 p.m. to morrow. The Lyttelton leaves Blenheim for Nelson to-day. The Charles Edward is due at Greymouth from Hokitika to-day. The Murray left for Wanganui last night, and is expected back on Friday morning. The Dauntless arrived safely at Havelock yesterday. The Albion was due at Hokitika this morning, but we have not yet heard of her arrival there. The Kennedy arrived from Wellington early this morning, and leaves for West Coast ports at 6 o'clock this evening. The Grafton will arrive here from Wellington on Friday morning, and sail for Westport and Greymouth at 2 p.m. same day. The next steamer for Melbourne will be the Arawata, leaving Wellington on Monday. Passengers for her will be conveyed by the Wanaka on Friday. The Wellington, with the Southern portion of the San Francisco mail, left Onehuuga at two o'clock this afternoon for New Plymouth, from wheuce she proceeds direct to Wellington, and thence to Lyttelton. Her passengers and cargo will be taken by the Wanaka, which leaves here at 3 pm. on Friday, and calls at Picfcon and Wellington on her way North. The Wanaka leaves Wellington at noon to-morrow, will arrive here on Friday morning, and sail for Picton, Wellington, Tarauaki and Manukau nt 3 o'clock iv the afternoon, taking passengers for Lyttelton, Dunedin, Napier, Gisborne, and Taurauga. The Court of Appeal at Sydney has just given their decision in an important kidnapping case, the plaintiff in which was Mr Burns, a large shipowner of Sydney, and the defendant Lieut. Nowell of H.M. schooner Sandfly. The lieutenant, it was alleged, had improperly Beized and detained plaintiff's vessel, named the Aurora, and her cargo. Lord Justice Baggally said it was not necessary in order to determine this action to decide whether in fact the vessel at the time of the seizure was engaged iv contravention of the Act, though, in justice to 1 the shipowner and the master, they should declare their opinion that it was not »o; but even on the assumption that it was so, they had come to the conclusion that the judgment for the defendant must be upheld. The judgment of the Court therefore proceeded; upon this— that the defendant was justified as acting "in pursuance of the Act," he bona fide believing, and having reasonable grounds for suspecting, that an offence against the Act had been committed, and that it was his duty to act as he did. In conclusion, the Lord Justice having delivered this judgment, added that he regarded this a very hard case upon the plaintiff, the owner of the chip, and he would have been glad to see his way to afford him redress.