General News.

Thames Star, Volume XII, Issue 3993, 15 October 1881, Page 3

General News.

In a Dundas street dry goods store three ladies were purchasing goods side by side, One of them hung her umbrella by the handle on the edge of the counter and went to another part of the establishment. One of those who still remained laid her purse on the counter, and while making her purchases it was accidently shoved into the folds of the upturned umbrella. When the clerk tore off his cheque and the lady reached for her pocket book it was gone. She had just laid it on the counter, and of course the lady who stood beside her must have taken it. Nothing could be clearer. In the excitement which followed the first mentioned lady took possession of her umbrella and walked out of the store, totally ignorant of what was within it. A policeman was called, and amid much indignation and grief on one side and blustering on the other the innocent woman was searched. Of course the purse was not found, and she was allowed to go. Now for the sensational part of the story. The umbrella was taken over to a hotel, thrown into a buggy, taken home, and laid away. A few days later the house was burned down, but the nmbrella among other things was saved. A few weeks passed, and then one day it was hoisted and out fell the missing purse. The lady remembered the incident in the store, and on her next visit to it brought back the money and had it restored to the owner. In the period which intervened the woman who had been wrongfully accused had visited the store daily for. the purpose of ascertaining whether anything had turned up to prove her innocence. The story is vouched for on the best authority, and is literally true.—English Paper. viscountPowerscourtj speaking today at the annual meeting of the Cobden Club said that as an Irish landowner he had thought a great deal about the land question during the existing agitation, and he had come to the conclusion that there was only one mode by which the Irish Land difficulty could be settled on a permanent basis, which was by giving tenant right to all tenants. He entertained that opinion before Mr Parnell's agitation commenced, and he felt confident that its adoption would prove beneficial to the country. It had been said that the adopton of the principle of tenant right would in no way benefit the landlord, but would, on the contrary, injure him ; but his contention was that the tenant right would give security to the landlord, and, of course, security to the tenant, which he desired, and which he, Lord Powerscourt, thought he rightly desired and claimed. It was well known in Ireland that the tenants had done a portion of the improvements on the farms, and although the landlords bad done a great deal, there was no case in which the landlord had done all; he thought therefore that the tenant was entitled' to this tenantright. It was said that when the Irish Land Bill got into the House of Lords that the question of compensation to landlords would be raised. As an Irish landlord he wished to say that he did not sac why the landlords of Ireland should be compensated, because he thought their position would be much more secure after the passing of the bill than before tenantright was adopted, and that in consequence of tenant-right the landlord would have a better chance of getting his rent. He stood almost alone in the House .of Lords amongst Irish landowners in the view he entertained upon this question, and he begged to thank the members of the club for that opportunity of speaking upon that important subject. (Hear, hear.)