NEWS BY THE ENGLISH MAIL,

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2315, 18 August 1880, Page 2

NEWS BY THE ENGLISH MAIL,

OUTRAGES IN IRELAND. Scones of violence and outrage are becoming frequent again in Ireland. A few days ago an alarming riot occurred at Dunmorekane, near Ballinamorc, county Leitrim. Mr Henry B. Acheson, who lives in county Roscommon, arrived with a party of labourers to fence a farm from which a tenant had been evicted. The men had not been long at work when some hundreds of peasantry from the surrounding district assembled on the spot, armed with spades, pitchforks, stones, and a few of them with guns. With shouts of execration and volleys of stones, they compelled the proprietor and his party to desist and fly for their lives. Mr Acheson discharged three shots from arevolvcr and wounded one man, who died the next day. The police were promptly at the scene, but were received with showers of stones which wounded some of them. Mr Acheson, who escaped unhurt, has been arrested. This is the second unsuccessful attempt he has made to fence the farm.

A farmer residing at Craggagh, near Balia, was on June 14 seized by a number of men, who “ carded” him, pierced his cars, and otherwise intimidated him. His assailants also discharged several shots over the house. The outrage is ascribed to the fact that the injured man recently took some land from Nvbicb a tenant had been evicted.

Two tenants on the property of Hifi. Gibbons, 0.P., at Ballincorrig, about three miles from Westport, were evicted on June 14. During the proceedings the sheriff was assaulted and pelted with mud. The people would have assaulted the police hut for the intervention of some representatives of Hie Land League. The sheriff’s horse was pelted with stones, and rushed away wildly through the country, leaving the sheriff to make his way on foot. Some occurrences of a serious nature have just taken place at Tnam, marked by an inhuman brutality. The house of a" fanner who resides at Sylanc was entered by a party of disguised men, who dragged the unfortunate occupant outside and carded him. The man’s desk was terribly lacerated. He could make no resistance, and is either unable or unwilling to identify the perpetrators of that diabolical deed. The cause alleged is some dispute about a bog. On the same evening (he house of'"another man residing at Gloonkocly was entered, and presumably by the same party of murdering manrauders. The unfortunate man was forced out of Ids dwelling, and submitted to the same cruel treatment. The cause supposed to lead to this villamms act was Ids having taken some land recently. The houses of these men were considerably damaged and leaden pellets found in the window sills show signs of shots having been used by the aggressors. The same evening'’the residence of Mr Lynch was disturbed by the reports of shots outside, but happily no damage was caused. THE TICHBORNE CLAIMANT CASE.

The writ of error in the case of

“ThomasCastro,otherwise Arthur Orton otherwise Sir Charles Doughty Tichborne, Bart., v. the Queen,” came on For argument on Juno 22 in the Court of Appeal at Westminster, composed of Lords Justices James, Bramwell, and Brett, ns one of the plaintiff in error upon a sentence dated Feb. 28, 1874 by the Lord Chief Justice of England and Justices Mellor and Lush, sitting in the Queen’s Bench division, on his conviction on two counts of an indictment for perjury committed by him during the proceedings in Chancery and at common law in an action of ejectment brought by him to recover the Tichborue estate.

Mr Benjamin, in opening - the ca.se, said that lie proposed in the lirst instance to call attention to the second count, which charged perjury committed on April 7,1808, by the plaintiff in error, in a suit by him, claiming - to be Sir Roger Doughty Tichborne, Bart, in which he prayed the Court of Chancery to take the necessary proceedings to enable him to recover the Tichborne estates. He contended that here there was one entire proceeding and one offence, namely, that of personating Sir Uoger Tichborne, whereas, according to the assignments, he was Arthur Orton, Coming to the verdict, the jury found the accused “ Guilty ” on both counts of the indictment, and the question now arose, was it a verdict of guilty on one or both counts ? On this linding of the jury the sentence was that the accused —the now plaintiff in error—should be kept in penal servitude for seven years on the lirst count ; and on the second count for the further term of seven years, to commence on the expiration of the lirst term of penal servitude fur tho offence charged in the indictment. The second count did not allege that any order had been made, or any issue raised, but simply that perjury was committed in an aflidavit made, in order to obtain an order for a decree. The law did not punish falsehood as perjury, but for a violation of an oath ±o tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ; that was, either by withholding something or swearing what was not true. In tins particular case the perjury charged was that the accused swore that lie was Sir Roger Tichborne and not Arthur Orton ; and once be swore he was Sir Roger Tichborne the perjury was proved, and be could be guilty of no more perjury in swearing be was not Arthur Orton or anyone else. It was one false oath, “ I am Sir Roger Tichborne,” and it could not be subdivided over and over again into distinct and separate offences.

Lord Justice James —Suppose tlic jury found tliat be was Sir Roger Tickborne, but that, in order to induce that belief, be bad sworn falsely to other things, would not that be perjury ? Mr Benjamin replied that the real issue was this—" Was be Sir Roger Tiobborne? The oifence charged was that bo personated Sir Roger Ticbborne, and committed perjury in swearing be was Sir Roger Ticbborne.

Lord Justicc Bramwell —In other words, a man cannot commit perjury if be is right in a lawsuit. Mr Benjamin said that in no case but the present one bad it ever occurred that when a man bad been convicted on two counts of an indictment be could be sentenced to a punishment in excess of that which bo could be sentenced on the one count, After some further arguments, Lord Justice James gare judgment. He held that the writ of error bad been imprudently granted, and that tire Court* of Queen’s Bench was perfectly right in awarding two successive sentences of penal servitude for two perjuries—the one committed in proceedings in

Chancery and the other at the trial—in furtherance of a fraudulent attempt of the accused to obtain another person’s estates. It would he monstrous to suppose that by the law of England a man could commit a number of offences, which in the present instance was perjniy, and yet receive no more punishment than if he had only committed one offence. Lord Justice Brarawcll and Lord Justice Brett concurred. The writ of error was therefore discharged, and judgment was entered for the Crown. A CHANCE FOR FARMERS. Now that the troubles with the Zulus and Boers are at an end, there is no doubt that the colonisation of South Africa will rapidly progress, especially as great temptations are held out by the Cape Government to surplus humanity to go to those-parts. Any man with a few pounds can become a farmer there. This is what the Cape Government offers to respectable agriculterists, married or single, not over forty-five years old, desirous of emigrating to Cape Colony : —A free passage for the settler and family, and land in the finest agricultural and grazing district of the Cape at 10s per acre; the payment to he made in ten years, at one. shilling the acre per year. HARD ON YESEY STEWART. The following letter appears in the “ Times,’’ in reply to one from Mr Yesey Stewart : “Burcott, Surbiton, Surrey, June 25. “ Sir, —The letter of Mr Yesey Stewart, which appears in the “ Times ” of this morning, must be taken emu gra.no sails, because he called on me within the last month and stated that the Government of New Zealand had given to him 20,000 or 25,000 acres of land in the county of Taurauga, on the sole condition of his providing a certain number of emigrants, and that lie was now in this country endeavoring to sell the land and provide the emigrants, and as I had ridden over the land, and knew it on my tour througlijthe colony, Mr Stewart desired rac to certify as to its quality, Ac. Mr Stewart says that the price of unimproved land varies from LJ to £(’> per acre in the southern district of Auckland, and .1 submit that so long as the Government makes free grants, the sole condition being the importation of emigrants and a certain amount of cultivation, and so long as the Government announces that it has ISO,OOO acres open for settlement in the county of Taurauga and thirty-four million acres in the colony in general, the value of land is the price at which the Government will sell it, and not the price which private individuals ask for it. Were there any doubt on the subject, I have before me one of the last public sales, in which land was sold in Taurauga at 20s per acre. I have no interest in New Zealand, land or money investment, bat 1 think it well to direct our surplus capital, bone, and sinew to our own flag; and f believe that object is frustrated when the Colonial Government rate for land is represented above that at which land is procurable in the United States. —I am, Sir, your obedient servant, J. Broojlhaix, J.B. A BLIND riLG-RIM. Among the passengers who arrived at the Orleans terminus in Baris a few days back was a grey-bearded man, of about fifty, in Oriental garb, with eyes wile open, but void of expression, the unfortunate stranger being blind from cataract. lie was led by the hand by a little girl of ten, of interesting appearance, also in Eastern dress. Both bore on their countenances signs of fatigue. The, child guided her father outside the station, and then addressing a bystander, said, “Hospital! hospital!” This was evidently the only word in French they knew. A railway servant assisted them into a cab, and ordered the driver to take them to the Hotel Dien, but there they could not be received, as the afiliction from which the man was suffering was not one of those treated there ; and besides he had not the required order for admission. The cabman then took them to the police station in the Rue de I’Arsenal, where the police, moved at their distress, gave them food and allowed them to rest on the couches. The inspector on duty questioned them, but the only reply lie could obtain was the words, “Mahmoud, Telia, Jerusalem, hospital.” Later in the evening the commissary called in making his round and tried the old man in Spanish. The latter understood him, and elapsed his hands as if to thank Heaven for having sent him some one to whom he could speak. He then related in Spanish the circumstances that had brought them to Baris. His name was Mahmoud and that of Ids daughter Telia. He was a small shopkeeper at Jerusalem, and while travelling in the desert had contracted a blindness from which he could obtain no relief in his own country. He thou resolved to come to Paris to obtain treatment, and leaving his business to his wife and younger children ho started with his daughter, carrying with them some carpets and perfumery to sell on the way. They sailed from Jaffa in a trading ship and landed at Bordeaux after a long and fatiguing voyage Finally they had reached Paris with just a sum of 6f and two carpets, worth about 60f., remaining, The Commissionary of police obtained their admission to the Rothschild Hospital, where Mahomed and Telia will bo kept while the operation for cataract is being performed on the man.