Births, Marriages, & Deaths.
Announcements under this heading are charged for as follows:-- Marriage, 2s 6d; Death with funeral notice, 2s 6d; Obituary Notice, 1s 6d; Birth, 2s 6d. In every case such announcement must be prepaid and duly authenticated.
Births
SLATER -- July 21, at Buffalo, New York, the wife of Jonathan L. Slater, of a daughter.
Marriages
JOHNSTON--REILLY -- July 21, at the Methodist Church, Richhill, by the Rev. Henry Ball, Charles Henry Johnston, Belfast, to Mary, second daughter of Mr. Henry Reilly, Armagh.
MARKS--HOPPUS -- July 19, at St. Margaret's, Ockley, Surrey, by the Rev. F. P. Du Sautoy, Alfred Marks, of 155, Adelaide Road, South Hampstead, to Mary Anne Martha, daughter of the late Rev. Professor Hoppus, LL.D,, F.R.S., of University College, London.
WRIGHT--AIKEN -- July 21, at All Saints, Eglantine, by the Rev. F. W. Hogan, Rector of the Parish, assisted by the Rev. H. J. Davis, Banbridge, James Henry Wright, second son of the late Hugh Wright, Banbridge, to Elizabeth (Lizzie), eldest daughter of Jackson Aiken, Moy, County Tyrone.
Deaths
ANDERSON -- July 22, at her late residence, 24, Shore Street, Holywood, Anne, eldest daughter of the late Thomas Anderson. Funeral private.
BAIRD -- July 21, at Avonmore, Fortwilliam Park, Belfast, William S. Baird, J.P., of the firm of W. & G. Baird, and proprietor of the Belfast Evening Telegraph, aged 62 years. His remains will be removed from his late residence for interment in the Borough Cemetery, this (Friday) morning, at ten o'clock.
BAYNE -- July 21, at his residence, High Street, Antrim, Thomas Bayne. The remains of my beloved husband will be removed for interment in Millrow Burying-ground, Antrim, this (Friday) morning, at eleven o'clock. Friends will please accept this intimation. AGNES BAYNE.
LANG -- July 20, at 106, Moyne Road, Dublin, Emma Lang (formerly of Gracehill, County Antrim), aged 38 years.
MEYRTCK -- July 20, at Liverpool, Edward Webber Warren Meyrick, M.R.C.S., Eng., Surgeon Dominion Line Steamers, aged 49 years.
MURDOCH -- At his residence, 9, Frances Street, Newtownards, John Murdoch (formerly of Glasgow). Interment in the family burying-ground, Movilla, this (Friday) afternoon, at four o'clock. Friends will please accept of this (the only) intimation.
PUREFOY -- At Belton, Olive Mary, daughter of the Rev. A. D. Purefoy, aged 18 months.
WALLACE -- July 22, at his father's residence, 14, Burke Street, Belfast, Richard James (Dick), only surviving son of Archibald Wallace.
Clippings
POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
CUSTODY COURT -- YESTERDAY.
[Before Mr. F. J. MacCARTHY, R.M.; Mr. HENRY THOMPSON, J.P.; Mr. D. B. LYTLE, J.P.; and Mr. SAMUEL LAWTHER, J.P.)
CHARGE OF ASSAULT.
James Taylor was charged with having assaulted a man named Reilly by striking him on the head with a stick.
Mr. D. F. Spiller, jun., prosecuted, and Mr. Sheals defended.
The constable stated that he saw the prisoner striking Reilly on the head, and breaking a stick over his head. Reilly did not appear to prosecute.
Mr. SHEALS examined for the defence two witnesses, who proved that Reilly struck the prisoner twice, and attempted to pull him off the car before the prisoner struck him.
The COURT fined the prisoner, who had been previously convicted, in 10s and costs.
CHARGE OF FIGHTING.
Christina Major and Mary O'Neill were charged with fighting in Peter's Hill on the previous day.
Mr. Spiller prosecuted and Mr. Harper defended.
The constable who made the arrest proved that he saw the two women fighting.
A witness was examined on behalf of Major, who proved that she was first attacked by the other prisoner.
The prisoners were each fined in 5s and costs.
DRUNK IN CHARGE.
William J. Hillis was charged with having been drunk in charge of a horse and cart, and fined in 10s and costs.
ALLEGED LARCENY OF A WATCH.
John Mallon was charged by Sergeant Sheridan with having stolen a watch, the property of a person at present unknown.
Sergeant Sheridan proved that he arrested the prisoner on the charge of stealing the watch. After cautioning him, the prisoner said he found the watch at the Alhambra.
The prisoner was remanded.
ASSAULTING THE POLICE.
Robert Leonard was charged with having assaulted several constables in the execution of their duty.
Sergeant Jones and Constable Malcolmson proved that the prisoner assaulted them, and kicked them several times.
The COURT sent him to gaol for twelve months with hard labour.
WIFE ASSAULTS.
A man named Campbell, for assaulting his wife by kicking her, was ordered to be imprisoned for six calendar months.
Samuel M'Mullan Was also charged with having assaulted his wife.
Evidence having been given,
The prisoner promised to take the pledge was bound in his own recognisances in £10 to keep the peace for the next twelve mouths.
Mr. Sheals defended the accused.
RIOT AT THE ALEXANDRA DOCK.
Mr. HARPER said in the case of the prisoners charged with taking part in the riot at the Alexandra Dock, and whose trial was postponed to the spring assizes at Downpatrick, he had to apply to Mr. MacCarthy that the prisoners, who had complied with the condition of bail, should be discharged.
Mr. MacCARTHY asked who represented the constabulary.
Mr. HARPER replied that Mr. Bull was the only one he would recoguise as representing the constabulary.
Mr. MACCARTRY directed Mr. Bull to be communicated with, and the subject dropped.
-- -- -- -- -- --
SUMMONS COURT.
[Before the Hon. Col. FORBES, R.M.; Mr. WM. BELL, J.P., aud Mr. ALFRED JAFFE, J.P.
ALLEGED ASSAULTS.
Three men named William Mairs, Hugh Whinny, and Patrick Smith were summoned by Sergeant Hussey for assaulting William M'Kee in Ballymacarrett.
Mr. James M'Lean, jun., prosecuted, and Mr. Sheals defended.
From the evidence of M'Kee it seemed that he was going through Ballymacarrett, when he was attacked by the prisoners, knocked down, kicked, and otherwise beaten.
A number of witnesses were examined in support of this statement.
The COURT ordered Mairs to be imprisoned for one month, and the others for two months.
=========================
ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
COUNTY ANTRIM.
CROWN COURT.
Mr. Justice O'BRIEN entered the Crown Court of the County Courthouse at half-past ten o'clock yesterday morning, and resumed the criminal business of the assizes.
H. H. Bottomley, Esq. (Sub-Sheriff), and H. M'Neile M'Cormick, Esq., Deputy and Acting Clerk of the Crown, were in attendance.
THE LISBURN MANSLAUGHTER CASE.
Thomas Sloan, shoemaker, pleaded guilty to an indictment charging him that he, on the 10th of the present month, at Lisburn, did feloniously kill add slay one Richard M'Clenaghan.
Mr. G. H. SMITH, on behalf of the prisoner, said, with the permission of the Court, he would beg to state a few circumstances in connection with the occurrence. He took it that his Lordship would read the depositions, and by them he would find that on the day named the prisoner and the deceased man, Richard M'Clenaghan, met on the road near Lisburn. Prisoner had had some drink taken, but whether the deceased was also under the influence of liquor did not appear on the face of the depositions. There was, however, sufficient to show that on meeting the deceased threw down his hat and challenged prisoner to fight. A wrestling or scuffling encounter, probably half in jest, occurred between them. but this developed into a serious contest in which blows were struck on either side. The prisoner, without doubt, struck the deceased in the course of the fight, knocking him down. As he fell deceased's head came in violent contact with the ground, rendering him insensible. He was taken home by some friends and died the same evening. The post-mortem examination on the body showed that as the result of the injuries deceased received there was a gathering of blood on the brain, which caused death. Prisoner on being arrested admitted striking the blow, but expressed himself deeply sorry for it, adding that he would not have had it occur for a thousand pounds. The deceased had a wife and two or three children, and as showing the earnest desire on the part of the prisoner and his friends to make reparation as far as possible for what had been done, a sum of money -- about £25 -- had been gathered among them for the benefit of M'Clenaghan's family, although those who subscribed it were only very poor people. The deceased man, he might mention, was a black-smith, aud the prisoner a working shoemaker. They had been good friends up to the time of the occurrence, and undoubtedly drink had something to do with the unfortunate quarrel which led to the inadvertent blow. He (Mr. Smyth) would ask his Lordship kindly to hear one or two witnesses as to character and to read a couple of letters on the prisoner's behalf.
Mr. John Ritchie, Lisburn, was called, and stated that he had known the prisoner from a child, and had always esteemed him "a quiet, honest, decent man."
His LORDSHIP said he would read the depositions, and in the meantime the prisoner might be put back.
CRIMINAL ASSAULT.
Thomas M'Callum, a private in the 71st Highland Light Infantry, at present in garrison in Belfast, was indicted with having, on the 25th May last, criminally assaulted Ellen Quinn.
Mr. M'Mahon, Q.C., and Mr. Dodd, Q.C., prosecuted. Mr. G. H. Smith and Mr. T. O'Shaughnessy (instructed by Mr. J. Carr) defended the prisoner.
Ellen Jane Quinn deposed, in answer to Mr. M'MAHON, that she resided in Curtis Street. On the 24th May she went to the military barracks between eleven and twelve o'clock at night in company with Colour-Sergeant Davenport, with whom she remained at his quarters until three o'clock in the morning. She left with three soldiers who came to take her from the barracks. Prisoner was one of the three. When they came to the guardroom prisoner caught her by the arm and said she would have to go in and get a pass before she could leave the barracks. She accompanied him into the guardroom, where he asked Sergeant Cook, sergeant of the guard, if he would give her a pass. The latter said "Yes," opening a door leading off the guardroom, and asking her to go in. Witness refused to do so. Sergeant Cook then left the guardroom. Witness asked prisoner for a drink of water, and he told her to follow him and she would get it. She went in after him, and when inside he slammed the door to, threw her down on a stretcher, and criminally assaulted her. He then rang a bell, still holding her, and Sergeant Cook came in and also assaulted her. She screamed and struggled, and did her best to resist. Another soldier named Crawford then came in and attempted to assault her, but did not succeed, and Cook and he then put her out of the barrack gate. She met Police Constable Harvey outside the barracks, and made a complaint to him of what had occurred. When outside she missed half a sovereign she had in her pocket.
In cross-examination by Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY, witness admitted that the house in Curtis Street where she lived was a house of ill-fame. While she was in Davenport's quarter the prisoner and the other two men came and asked if there was anyone in the quarters, and Davenport replied that there was. He then told her to go. Did not know what the prisoner and the other men were the military police.
Constable Harvey deposed that about half-past three in the morning in question he met the complainant, Quinn, coming from the direction of the barracks. She made a complaint to him, in consequence of which he and Sergeant Carey accompanied the woman to the military barracks. They went to the guardroom, where M'Callum was paraded with a number of others, and she identified him.
Sergeant Carey deposed that he accompanied the last witness and the young woman Quinn to the military barracks, There was a sergeant standing outside the gate, and witness asked him if he was sergeant of the guard. At that moment the sentry opened the wicket gate, and the sergeant, after looking at witness and the woman, ran away. Witness communicated with the officers, and they held a parade outside the guard-room. Quinn was present, and identified the prisoner on parade. Witness then arrested him, and charged him with criminally assaulting Ellen Quinn. Being cautioned, his officer directed him to make no statement. Witness arrested another soldier named Crawford the same day.
This completed the case for the Crown.
Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY having stated the case for the defence,
Several witnesses were examined in the prisoner's behalf.
Private Wm. Mitchell, 71st Highlanders (who had made a deposition for the Crown, but who was not called by them), was examined by Mr. SMITH -- He deposed that on the morning of the day in question, about three o'clock, in consequence of an intimation he received from Sergeant Cook, sergeant of the guard, he went to Colour-Sergeant Davenport's quarters in the barracks, accompanied by Privates Townley and M'Caughey, who, with witness, were members of the guard on that night. They went to the colour-sergeant's quarters and asked if there was anyone there. He replied that there was, and entering they found the girl in bed. She was ordered to get up, and they took her down to the guardroom. The prisoner M'Callum was not with them at all. He was in the guardroom. The girl was brought to the guardroom and given up to Sergeant Cook. Witness was afterwards called upon to assist in putting her out. After giving the girl in charge to Sergeant Cook witness went to have a lie down on the guard bed. M'Callum was lying there also fast asleep. It was about five minutes from the time they brought the girl down until they were called to put her out. During that time M'Callun did not rise.
Cross-examined by Mr. M'MANON -- The reason they went to Colour-Sergeant Davenport's quarters was because there was a light in the window, and because they had a suspicion that the girl was there. They brought her down to the guardroom for the purpose of handing her over to the sergeant of the guard, as it was their duty to do.
In answer to his LORDSHIP, the witness stated that he was in the guard when the police came down with the girl. As soon as the wicket-gate was opened Sergeant Cook ran away.
Private John M'Caughey, also of the Highlanders stated that he was one of the military police the night in question. He was in bed and was called up by Privates Townley and Mitchell, who stated that the sergeant of the guard had given orders that he was to see a woman out of barracks. He accompanied them to Colour-Sergeant Davenport's quarters, where they found the girl, Ellen Quinn. It was a military offence bringing the girl in, and the colour-sergeant had since been degraded for the offence. The women was ordered to get up, and was put in charge of the file of men who were with him. She was taken to the guardroom in the usual manner, and handed over to the sergeant of the guard.
Musician Edwin Roarke (Highlanders) deposed that he was in the guardroom on the night in question. M'Callum was lying on the guard-bed asleep when the girl was brought in. She went into the inner room with Private Townley, The latter came out in about five minutes. The girl remained there, and Sergeant Cook went into the room and remained about five or ten minutes, bringing the girl out with him when he returned. She was put out of the barrack gates.
Private Townley, another of the soldiers of the Highland Regiment, corroborated the statement of the witnesses Mitchell and M'Caughey with reference to bringing the girl Quinn from Sergeant Davenport's quarters, and that on the way down he made overtures to her; that she asked him for a drink; that he gave her some tea in the guardroom, and that she afterwards accompanied him into one of the cells. Sergeant Cook then came came in, and the woman was then conducted out of the barracks by his direction.
The prosecutrix was recalled, and, in reply to his LORDSHIP, denied Townley's allegation.
John Davenport (late colour-sergeant in the Highland Regiment) was also examined.
Mr. SMITH addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner, and Mr. M'MAHON replied for the Crown.
His LORDSHIP having reviewed the evidence in detail,
The jury, after a brief absence, acquitted the prisoner.
When the verdict was announced there was some applause from a number of the Highlanders who were in court, but the demonstration was immediately suppressed.
THE RIOT CASES.
POSTPONEMENT OF THE TRIALS.
The following persons charged with offences in connection with the recent riots in Belfast were put forward in the dock:-- James M'Ilvenny, feloniously shooting at with intent on the 6th June; Samuel Irvine, Samuel Crawford Irvine, James Irvine. William Irvine, and Henry Walker, riot on the 9th June; John Riordan, feloniously shooting at with intent on the 16th June; Alex. M'Ardle, Wm. Graham, Alex. Page, and J. Page, and W. Britton, assaulting a dwelling house on the 10th June: Alexander Montgomery, Robert Boyle, Simpson Browne, Thomas M'Cartney, and Walter M'Roberts, assaulting a dwelling-house on the 10th June; John Christie, shooting at with intent on the 13th July; James Fleming and Wm. Niblock, assaulting a dwelling house on the 9th June; William George Morrow, breaking and entering on the 9th June; William Miller, Jas. H. Hamilton, Thos. Hogg and Jno. Miller, assaulting a dwelling-house on the 12th June; and Joseph Wright, assaulting a dwelling house on the 5th June.
Mr. M'MAHON said he was instructed by the Attorney General to make an application for a postponement of the trials. The application was granted on an affidavit of Mr. Greer, Crown Solicitor, which was as follows:-- "The Queen, complainant; James Fleming, Thomas Niblock, Wm. George Morrow, Samuel Irvine, S. Crawford Irvine, James Irvine, William Irvine, Henry Walker, Alexander Montgomery, Robert Boyle, S. Brown, Thomas M'Carthy, Walter M'Roberts, William Miller, James H. Hamilton, Thomas Hogg, J. Miller, Alex. M'Ardle, Wm. Graham, Alex. Page, Joseph Page, Wm. Britton, James M'Ilvenny, John Riordan, Joseph Wright, and John Christie, traversers. -- I, James Greer, of Coneywarren, Omagh, County of Tyrone, Crown Solicitor for the County of Antrim, make oath and say as follows:-- These cases have been returned for trial at the present assizes. Both before and since the occurrences connected with the case took place several other serious riots took place in Belfast, and outrages of a serious nature, resulting in loss of life and property, have been perpetrated. I say that consequent thereon there is an excited state of feeling in Belfast and the County Antrim, and from my own knowledge of the facts of the case, and from all the information I can obtain, I believe it will be essential to a dispassionate investigation of the facts not to enter upon the trial of these cases without allowing time for the subsidence of such angry and party feeling; and for the reasons I have mentioned I believe that at the present assizes a fair and impartial trial would not be had. And I believe it is essential for the ends of justice that the trial of these cases should not be proceeded with at the present assizes. The bills in these cases (save Christie's) were only found last night as the Court was rising, and Christie's this day, and I had not an opportunity of making this application before. The depositions in Christie's case were only received by me yesterday. Sworn in open Court by me, James Greer, at Belfast, this 22nd day of July. 1886." That affidavit had been sworn by Mr. Greer, and upon it he (Mr. M'Mahon) asked to have the trials postponed. Some of the traversers had sworn affidavits in reply, objecting to the postponement. In the case of the Irvines, Samuel Irvine had made an affidavit in which he said that he had been returned for trial to these assizes with his sons and one Henry Walker, charged with riot and firing; that they were prepared for their trial at the present assizes, and bad employed counsel and subpoenaed witnesses for their defence; that their witnesses were prepared to prove that their house (the Irvines) was wrecked on the night referred to in the indictment when his family and himself were in bed and that they were obliged to fly in their shirts -- (laughter) -- that they were all working people, and one important witness was about to leave the country, and others might leave the neighbourhood, and that unless the Crown were prepared to secure their attendance on a future occasion they (the prisoners) might be placed in great difficulty in defending themselves. And they, therefore, prayed that the case might be proceeded with at the present assizes. The appearances on behalf of the traversers were as follows:-- Mr. George Hill Smith (instructed by Mr. Scott) for Alex. Page and Joseph Page, and (instructed by Mr. Harper) for Wm. Miller, James Hamilton, and Thomas Hogg. Mr. T. L. O'Shaughnessy (instructed by Mr. Carr) for Jas. Fleming, Thomas Niblock, Wm. George Morrow, and John Riordan: Messrs. Smith and O'Shaughnessy (instructed by Mr. Harper) for Samuel Irvine, Samuel Crawford Irvine, James Irvine, Wm. Irvine, Henry Walker, Alex. Montgomery, Robert Boyle, Joseph Wright, and John Christie. Mr. Hans M'Mordie (instructed by Mr. Harper) appeared for J. Miller, Wm. Graham, and Alex. M'Ardle. and (instructed by Mr. Scott) for Simpson Browne. Mr. J. B. M'Hugh (instructed by Mr. Carr) for James M'Ilvenny.
Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY said he appeared for the Irvines, with Mr. Smith, and he strongly objected to the postponement. They were very respectable men.
His LORDSHIP -- What are the particular acts charged against them?
Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY -- Firing at a wrecking party. They were, as they say in their affidavit, obliged to fly from the house in their shirts in the middle of the night. What they say is that one of their principal witnesses is about to leave the country, and that the result of postponing this trial, having regard to the nature of the defence, will be to jeopardise their liberty. They very fairly say, too, that if this trial is to be postponed, let the Crown secure the attendance of these witnesses for us. Working people of their class are to some extent a floating population. There is a statement in the affidavit about excitement in Belfast. No person could deny that, though whether it would reach a jury-box or not no person could say. The Irvines fear no trial -- they are ready to meet the charges against them either now, or at any future time, but they do not wish to be tried with their hands behind their backs. Of the other traversers for whom he appeared, he might say the same.
Mr. SMITH said he appeared with his friend Mr. O'Shaughnessy for the Irvine's, and also for some of the other prisoners. Practically, the case made in the affidavit of Samuel Irvine was the case of all the traversers. He need not remind his Lordship of the general principle of law by which a person indicted with any offence is entitled to bave his trial at the first possible opportunity. He submitted that the Crown had not succeeded in showing reasonable ground for the postponement. He made no allegation against Mr. Greer -- Mr. Greer undoubtedly believed every word that he had sworn. But he challenged Mr. Greer to prove the assumption that a jury of the County Antrim would not honourably and impartially deal with cases of this kind -- no master what circumstances surrounded it -- as they had done in other cases far more difficult than this, and in which far more party feeling had been exhibited.
His LORDSHIP -- What do you say to Montgomery's case and the Pages?
Mr. SMITH -- My observations apply to all alike. The men have made every preparation for their trial at these assizes. It has been a great effort to people in their position, and it would be extremely hard if they should be as they will be -- prejudiced by the postponement.
Mr. O'SHAUGHSESSY -- I would like to mention a word about Fleming's case. That is a case of home protection against wrecking, and M'Ilvenny's is much on the same lines. It seems as if the persons who were engaged in defending themselves against assault and outrage have been put in the dock and not the rioters.
Mr. H. M'MORDiE said be appeared for Simpson Browne, Alexander M'Ardle, and Wm. Graham. It was a grave matter that men who were returned to the assizes, and were ready for their trial should be kept with the charge hanging over them for an indefinite period.
His LORDSHIP -- It may be that in the result of this application the Crown will be under the moral obligation, if not a legal obligation, to make provision for the increased costs to the traversers if the application is granted.
Mr. M'MORDIE -- said he knew of no excitement that could have any connection with the trial of these traversers save that shown by the Crown Solicitor.
His LORDSHIP -- What do you say to the Crowd counsel? (Laughter.)
Mr. M'MORDIE (continuing) said they had heard a great deal about the classes and the masses lately, and whatever party had their ardour stimulated by these riots did not belong to the classes, and were only very unworthy representatives of the masses. They were certainly not the class of men that sit in the jury-box of this court. His case would be, he might say, that his clients were not engaged in any riot. As for the excitement which was stated io pervade some portion of this country, it existed among a very small minority, and did not in any way affect the jurors of the County Antrim. He had every confidence in the latter that they would do their duty honestly and independently. The class from which jurors are drawn are not the class which furnish street rioters in Belfast. The body of the Belfast traders, professional men, and others following their lawful industries, have no sympathy with these outbreaks of passion which end in the sacrifice of life and the destruction of property. They are on the side of law and order, aud if one thing is more manifest than another in the North of Ireland it is that the jurors of the North are not afraid to do their duty, and that they do it fearlessly and well, whether in times of popular excitement or under any other circumstances. Even 1f there was local excitement, how did the Crown argue that that could influence country jurors, the respectable farmers and men of business who come from every part of this great county. They are more interested in the putting down of riots, and lawlessness, and attacks upon property than perhaps any other class of people. It was a question of order as against violence and illegality, and as knowing the whole class of the jurors of the county, he asserted emphatically that these cases could be tried as fairly and impartially as ever cases were tried in any tribunal from the Giant's Causeway to Cape Clear. He (Mr. M'Mordie) submitted an affidavit of his clients, in reply to that of the Crown Solicitor, which stated -- That, if there is any excitement, it is more likely to continue than otherwise by the postponement of the trial, for a Commission had been appointed to take evidence with regard to the recent riots, which would not be on oath, and the holding of which while they (the traversers) were in custody would tend to increase the excitement." He had no doubt that, when that Commission terminated its labours, perhaps they would at Christmas, they would see a vastly more excited state of things than at present existed. The Crown, he maintained, had been reckless in its suggestion that a miserable question of religion or politics would prevent independent jurors from doing their duty, and on behalf of his clients, and having regard to the great prejudice which it would be to their case if the witnesses who were now present and ready to be called should in the lapse of months become scattered over the country, and be unavailable for the purposes of the defence, he objected to the postponement.
Mr. DODD, Q.C., on behalf of the Crown, said the application had not been made without the most careful consideration and the clearest conviction of its necessity. They had had affidavits in reply to Mr. Greer's, and they had had a speech from Mr. M'Mordie -- a speech very proper, no doubt, in its proper place.
His LORDSHIP -- And very proper if made here.
Mr. DODD said not one of the prisoners, and not an advocate appearing for them, ventured to deny the assertion that an excitement existed in Belfast, such an excitement as must prejudice the fair hearing of the cases. He would respectfully urge that the application be granted.
Mr. Justice O'BRIEN -- This question has been discussed on former occasions, and if left to my own individual judgment I would have great difficulty in differing from or directly overruling the conclusion reached by other tribunals. An application of this kind was made in trials in another county, and made to the Court of Queen's Bench, and after a full consideration, the Court of Queen's Bench determined that the trials should be postponed solely upon the ground that whatever the independence and integrity of the class from which jurors are drawn, still there was a state of local excitement that would be hostile to the proper and impartial administration of the law. A question of the same kind was raised again before the judge who presides at the present moment in the other court in the County of Down, and a case involving a great amount of feeling arising out of an occurence in the town was postponed by him on precisely the same ground, although it might be reasonably suggested that the feeling that has arisen in this locality from the events referred to would not extend to the County of Down. And I would have considerable difficulty myself, even if I did not agree with the conclusions arrived at by other judges, in adopting a different course to that which they have adopted. But I am entirely satisfied that it is my duty, having regard to the integrity and independence and impartiality of the administration of the law, to accede to the application. I entirely agree with a great deal that Mr. M'Mordie has said with regard to the jurors of the County Antrim. He might have referred to a very remarkable example at not a very distant period, of trials of the same character being held in the locality where we now are, before an eminent member of the judicial bench, and resulting in almost every instance in verdicts entirely consonant with justice. We all recollect the cases of riot tried before Mr. Justice Lawson, aud we all recollect how justice was done -- and quickly and finally done -- in reference to these cases. I agree I say, in a great deal that Mr. M'Mordie has said in reference to the character and class of the jurors of the County Antrim. The application itself must not be taken, and the fact of the application being granted must not be taken as casting any kind of imputation upon them whatever, nor do I intend to be understood as saying a word to their prejudice in reference to their ability and integrity in the performance of their duty. I have, indeed, a certain amount of confidence that, notwithstanding the feeling that has arisen in this county -- in this locality -- in great many of these cases a jury of the County Antrim would sufficiently recognise their duty and their obligations, and would be easily animated to remember those duties and obligations, so that they would consider the cases submitted to them in a proper and impartial spirit, and find verdicts according to the law. I do not base my conclusion at all upon that ground, There is undoubtedly a high fever of excitement existing at the present in this locality. Mr. Greer, the Crown Solicitor, a gentleman to whose evidence, having regard to his great experience and the fact of his being the representative of the Crown, has stated on oath that in His belief there could not be an impartial trial in the present state of feeling. He is instructed to make this application by the Executive of the Government, and makes it in the name of the Attorney-General. That, however, is a feat by which I would not be affected in the least, if I thought it was not supported upon grounds of reason. I have always rejected the right of the Attorney-General to postpone any trial, and I just treat the Crown as any other individual in applications of the kind. But Mr. Greer has stated this upon his responsibility and upon oath, and circumstances all point to the necessity of the application. It is quite true that, though there are general statements contained in the affidavits -- very proper affidavits -- sworn by the prisoners as to the prejudice likely to occur to them in case of a postponement of their trial, there is no contradiction of the fact -- and no person, neither solicitor nor counsel, has undertaken to contravene the fact -- that there is a state of feeling existing in this community at present which would be fatal to an impartial trial. I can easily understand that the habits of working men such as the witnesses probably are, who may be called on behalf of the prisoners -- migratory habits generally -- may lead to a great deal of inconvenience. These inconveniences are almost inseparable from a postponement of any trial. But if evidence is now in existence that by reason of the postponement of these trials evidence might be lost to these men in the future conduct of these trials, due provision must be made to secure such evidence, if possible, on behalf of the prisoners. I cannot, in granting this application, but advert to the circumstance that all the indictments in these trials -- all the indictments for offences connected with these riots -- have been found without the least hesitation by the Grand Jury -- a body representing various classes and various interests -- interests involved in the highest degree in the maintenance of the law and the preservation of order. I make that observation -- take notice of that fact -- as showing beyond question the emphasis of condemnation that a body of that nature has pronounced, in common with all respectable members of the community, upon these occurrences, and as endorsing the statment of Mr. M'Mordie, that these riots are deeply inimical to the prosperity of this community. I do not suppose that any sympathy with the effect of these riots would find its way into the jury and influence their verdicts. But I cannot altogether -- using my own ordinary judgment and observation -- exclude from my mind that there are influences of various kinds at present at work in this community, which, by no art or ingenuity, or by any provision or protection whatever, could be excluded from the jury-box, and which would place even the jurors themselves, however well disposed they might be, in the greatest difficulty. I have regard to the position of jurors, who, though disposed to do their duty manfully, are often surrounded by influences which render it difficult for them to do so without danger of suffering loss or personal unpleasantness. This case should stand on the same ground as any other of the same nature, and I have no doubt whatever that the Crown will consider themselves bound -- as I consider they are bound -- to make provision for any costs and any expenses incurred by these men in preparing for a present trial.
The cases were postponed accordingly to the next assizes, all the traversers being admitted to bail, themselves in £10 and two sureties in £5 each.
ALLEGED LARCENY.
James Neill, in whose case the Grand Jury had thrown out a bill charging him with larceny at Belfast on the 9th inst., was discharged.
STEALING MONEY.
Samuel Wallace, a respectable looking young man, pleaded guilty to a charge of steal 1s 6d from his employer, Mr. Simms, a draper at Ballymena, on the 2nd inst.
Mr. Megaw, J.P., and Rev. Mr. Caldwell were called by Mr. TODD (instructed by Mr. Martin, Ballymoney) to give the witness a good character.
His LORDSHIP, having administered a caution to the prisoner, directed his discharge at the rising of the court.
LARCENY OF A COAT.
Robert Wilson, a poor-looking young man, pleaded guilty to an indictment charging him with the larceny of a coat belonging to Charles Armstrong at Ballymena on 17th inst.
His LORDSHIP said he had received a letter from gentleman in a very high position -- Rev. Dr. Murray, Dean of Connor -- who had very kindly condescended to write on behalf of so humble a person as the prisoner. In consequence of what that gentleman had said, he (his Lordship) would give him a chance. Already the prisoner had undergone a short incarceration, and he (the Judge) would allow him to be discharged at the rising of the Court.
FORGERY OF A CHEQUE FOR £500.
Jas. Lowe, a young lad, aged about 17 years, from Magherafelt, pleaded guilty to an indictment, charging him with the forgery of a cheque for the payment of £538 14s 2d, purporting to be drawn by Jas. Johnston, in the Northern Banking Company, Belfast.
Mr. Johnston, in whose employment the prisoner formerly was, having been examined as to the circumstances under which the offence was committed,
His LORDSHIP said he would read the depositions in the case, and he would pass sentence afterwards.
The prisoner was put back.
His Lordship adjourned till half-past ten o'clock this morning.
-- -- -- -- -- --
Yesterday, at twelve o'clock, an inquiry was held in the Grand Jury Room of the County Courthouse, before Mr. H. H. Bottomley, Under-Sheriff, and a jury, to asses damages in a case in which Archibald Burns sued Patrick M'Dade for the sum of £500, for the seduction by defendant of plaintiff's daughter and servant, Eliza Burns. Mr. A. H. Bates (instructed by Mr. M'Ninch, Larne) appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. W. H. Long (instructed by Mr. Harper) for the defendant. Several witnesses having been examined on both sides, the Sheriff reviewed the evidence, and the jury awarded the sum of £125.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
RECORD COURT.
Mr. Justice ANDREWS resumed the hearing of appeals yesterday in the Record Court. Mr. Thomas Cunningham and Mr. James Andrews were in attendance.
CLARKE, APPELLANT; LILLICO, RESPONDENT.
This was an action in which John G. Clarke, of Benvoir Cottage, Parkmore, sued James Lillico, of Mullagh Park, to recover £11 6s 8d for the grazing of 126 sheep on the lands of Parkmore, the property of the appellant and plaintiff, for twelve weeks, from the month of October to the month of January. There was also a cross-case in which Mr. Clarke was appellant and defendant, and Mr. Lillico plaintiff and respondent, the action being to recover £3 for the loss of eight sheep while grazing on the lands in question.
Mr. Whitaker (instructed by Mr. Stott) appeared for the appellant, and Mr. Hume (instructed by Mr. Currie) for the respondent.
The case had been partly heard on the previous evening. A decree had been given in the court below in favour of the plaintiff and appellant for £7 8s 9d, and against this decision he appealed alleging that the amount was too small.
After argument,
His LORDSHIP affirmed the decision.
In the cross-case it was alleged that the defendant through his shepherd had charge of the sheep. He alleged he had given tokens for some of the dead sheep, but that in other instances owing to the state of the sheep he was unable to do so.
After hearing the evidence, His LORDSHIP affirmed the decree.
LAW, APPELLANT; JOLLY, RESPONDENT.
This was an action to recover the sum of £16, for one year's rent, due by the appellant and defendant, James Law, to the respondent, of a certain house and premises held by Ann Cunningham as tenant to the plaintiff, at the yearly rent of £15. There was also a claim for £1 for dilapidation. In the court below the case was brought against Law and Miss Cunningham, and was dismissed on the merits as regarded Miss Cunningham, but as regards Law he was unable to attend; a medical certificate to that effect having been handed in, and in his absence the decree was given.
Mr. Whitaker (instructed by Mr. Stott) appeared for the appellant; and Mr. Harrison (instructed by Messrs. Cramsie & Greer) for the respondent.
The case for the plaintiff was that Mr. Law had agreed to become responsible to Mr. Jolly for the rent of the house which was occupied by Miss Cunningham, and a decree was given in the court below for £15. The defendant denied that he had ever agreed to become responsible for the rent, and he had merely introduced Miss Cunningham to Mr. Jolly without having furnished such a guarantee.
After hearing the evidence,
His LORDSHIP reversed the decision of the Court below, and dismissed the case on the merits.
LYNN, APPELLANT; HATTON, RESPONDENT.
This was an ejectment on the title brought to recover possession of a part of the lands of Barnish, in the parish of Culfeighton, in the County of Antrim, at present in occupation of defendant and respondent.
Mr. Cuming and Mr. Whitaker (instructed by Messrs. Cramsie & Greer) appeared for the appellant, and Mr. Todd (instructed by Mr. Martin) for the respondent.
The case was dismissed by the Court below.
The case for the appellant was that one Margaret Rankin had held the lands in question, together with another farm under Mr. M'Ildowney as a tenant from year to year. A fair rent had been fixed in December, 1881. In March, 1885, Mrs. Rankin entered into an adjustment agreement with one John Hutton, the son of the respondent, for the letting of portion of the lands in dispute for the season of 1884. The defendant had gone in under that agreement. For the defence it was contended that a portion of the lands were held by Margaret Rankin under a lease for lives, and that the present plaintiff could not recover them, as she was not heir-at-law. As to the residue, it was contended that a new arrangement had been entered into between Mrs. Rankin and the defendant afterwards, by which he was to hold the lands as tenant from year to year, and that on that agreement improvements had been made.
After argument,
His LORDSHIP reversed the decision of the Court below, and gave a decree for possession for so much of the lands comprised in the agreement referred to, except so much as was comprised in the lease.
JAMES REID, APPELLANT; JOSEPH M'KINSTRY, RESPONDENT.
The plaintiff in this came claimed under the will of the late Arthur Best, and a dispute arose as to the construction of the will, as to who was entitled to two and a half acres of the lands of Kinlough. In the court below a decree was given for ten guineas, and from that decree an appeal was lodged.
Mr. Shaw (instructed by Mr. Charley) appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Weir, Q.C. (instructed by Mr. M'Gonigle), appeared for the defendant.
In support of the plaintiff's case, Mr. M'Henry, of the Estates Court, and a number of other witnesses were examined to prove that the lands in dispute were originally held under the denomination of Alloon's land, and that they had been so occupied.
For the defendant a number of witnesses were examined to show that the lands had been in occupation of the defendant, and not under that of the plaintiff or his predecessor in title.
His LORDSHIP held that, notwithstanding evidence as to occupation, the question resolved itself into the construction of the will. He, therefore, was under the necessity, however reluctantly compelled, to reduce the decree of the County Court Judge from ten guineas to one shilling.
JOHN HARPER, APPELLANT; JOHN BORTHWICK, PLAINTIFF.
The plaintiff in this action is a grain merchant in Greenock, and the action was brought by him against John Harper, agent for the sale of his goods in this country, and to recover a sum of £30, loss sustained by him by reason of the defendant, as principal, having acted negligently in the discharge of his agency duties, and of having been induced to give credit to a person named John Butler, who resides in Lisburn. It was further alleged that, at the time of the transaction with Butler, the defendant knew that Butler was an uncertificated bankrupt, and at the same time held a bill of sale on the goods of the bankrupt to the extent of £200.
Mr. Dodd, Q.C., with Mr. Whitaker (instructed by Messrs. George M'Ildowie & Sons) were for the plaintiff; and Mr. Weir, Q.C. (instructed by Messrs. M'Lean, Boyle, & M'Lean), for the defendant.
Evidence was given ou behalf of the plaintiff, from which it appeared that, although the plaintiff sent to the defendant Stubbs's report, showing that a bill of sale for the sum of £200 existed against the property of John Butler (the name of the owner not being mentioned), and also that Butler had been adjudicated a bankrupt in 1879, yet the defendant, in answer to the plaintiff, stated that he himself held a bill, and that he was aware that Butler was an uncertificated bankrupt. It was further mentioned that £350 of the total of £666 by the amount of sales by the defendant were bad debts. A voluminous correspondence which had taken place between the parties was read, and amongst the first of the letters written by plaintiff to defendant the former expressed a wish "to be careful to sell only to good people, and avoid loss by bad debts." The defence was that whatever transaction took place there was no intention of perpetrating a fraud, but that the defendant had acted bonâ fide in the matter; and that it was not necessary to disclose to his principal the fact that one of his agents was an uncertificated bankrupt.
After having heard the evidence,
His LORDSHIP said he was able to acquit the defendant of any fraud, and if the process rested on the ground of fraud he would be willing to dismiss it; but he was unable to acquit him of gross negligence -- not, however, fraudulent negligence. It was grossly negligent for the defendant, acting as agent for his principal, to withhold the information he had in reference to the affairs of John Butler from the knowledge of the principal. He would, therefore, affirm the decree.
The Court then adjourned until this morning.
=========================
GRAND JURY.
THE Grand Jury sat in their room, County Courthouse, and resumed the fiscal business yesterday.
APPLICATION FOR COMPENSATION BY DISTRICT-INSPECTOR STRITCH.
District-Inspector Stritch, Belfast, claimed £3,000 compensation for personal injuries received during the riots in Belfast on the 8th June last in the discharge of his duty. Mr. Orr, Q.C. (instructed by Mr. Graham, solicitor), appeared for the applicant, and Mr. Orr, solicitor to the Grand Jury, appeared on behalf of that body.
Mr. ORR, in stating the case, said this was an application for £3,000 compensation by District-Inspector Stritch for injuries received by him in the discharge of his duty on the 8th of June last. On the evening of that day he was in Durham Street, and got between two contending mobs, and a regular riot ensued, in the course of which Mr. Stritch got struck on the right temple, and sustained fearful injuries -- injuries which would probably to permanent. Mr. Stitch joined the force fifteen years ago, and took a distinguished place with two or three candidates that paseed. He was made second-class sub-inspector in 1876, and first-class district-inspector in the present year.
The FOREMAN (Sir Francis Macnaghten, Bart.) -- Under what section do you bring the application?
Mr. ORR -- Under the 106th section of the Grand Jury Act. The question was whether there was power to levy any of the amount on the borough of Belfast. Continuing, counsel said that as regarded Mr. Stitch's position his pay was £225, and his various allowances amounted to £154, So that he was at present in receipt of £379 a year. After three years his pay would be increased by £25, after six years by £25 more, and after twelve years by £300. He had his chance of promotion for being county inspector or resident magistrate, and his name was actually down on the Lord Lieutenant's list for that post at the present moment, and there were other positions, such as town inspector, to which he might be promoted. Now, that was Mr. Stitch's position, and these were his prospects. If he retired at present his ordinary pension would only be £78. There was a section in one of the Constabulary Acts which enabled the authorities under certain circumstances to consider whether he had to retire on account of being disabled, and to give him the full amount of his present pay, £225; but, having regard to the fact that he was only fifteen years in the force, it was very improbable that he would get that amount, and he would also lose the other £154 that he was in possession of. The evidence the doctors would give them would convince them that it was extremely likely that his injuries were permanent. Nobody could ascertain what the result would be. His skull was battered in, and he was most seriously injured. He was sick and confined to bed, and he was delirious, and exhibited the symptoms and all the marks of shock. It was impossible to say how the injuries would end, and he might have to leave the force altogether. That being his position and prospects, he thought the Grand Jury would be disposed to compensate him very liberally. He knew a case where the sum of £15,000 was awarded to a constable's wife for the loss of her husband, who was shot in a riot. Another constable was awarded £250 for the loss of his forefinger. That being the scale, he thought the Grand Jury would be disposed to compensate Mr. Stritch very liberally for these injuries he had received in the discharge of his duty. The question then arose as to what the charge would be made upon. Was there any power to levy any of that part of the charge on the borough of Belfast? The 105th section says that they might either levy it on the barony or on the county at large. If they came to the conclusion that the compensation they awarded was rather large they could put it over the entire county, and very probably it would be the better course. The question was whether the borough of Belfast could be made to contribute anything to this compensation. The whole question was surrounded with difficulties, and if they thought it right they could take the opinion of the judge upon it. In the first place, it was perfectly clear that the Town Council had no power to entertain this application themselves. Mr. Stritch could not appear before them and apply for it.
The FOREMAN -- Can be not?
Mr. ORR -- No. This Grand Jury must give it to him or he cannot get at all. The question is whether the Town Council can be called upon to contribute a proportional part of the expense. Continuing, he said that the Grand Jury had no power to applot county cess within the borough. Section 6 says that nothing shall exonerate the borough from contributing towards the maintenance of the county asylum, the lunatic asylum, the county gaol, the county courthouse, and other things; and section 7 declared how the contribution of the borough for general purposes was to be determined; and that was to be determined by the Commissioners who were appointed under sections 8, 9. and 10. It came to this: Was Mr. Stritch to suffer because the Grand Jury and Town Council had omitted their duty, and had no power to make the award under section 14. If Mr. Stritch had been injured in Kerry or Cork the point would not have arisen at all; but simply because of a division in the borough of Belfast he was to be turned off without any compensation.
Mr. M'NEILL -- Under the circumstances is it in the jurisdiction of the Grand Jury to applot the expense of this outrage, which occurred in a district which is not in the jurisdiction of the Grand Jury? How can they assess damages?
Mr. ORR -- They can levy it on the rest of the county.
Dr. TRAILL -- Could we, in justice to the rate-payers in the peaceable County of Antrim, burden them with taxation for an occurrence which took place in Belfast?
Mr. YOUNG -- I think we should find whether the injury was malicious.
Mr. ORR -- The question is not one of malicious injury, but whether he was injured in the discharge of his duty.
Mr. YOUNG -- Well, that is another wording of it. If we come to the finding that he has been injured in the discharge of his duty how can we get rid of the natural consequences of levying the damages? I think you will be in a dilemma if you take a finding first.
Mr. ORR -- Would you agree to leave that matter to the judge?
Mr. YOUNG -- I only want the Grand Jury to understand the question.
Dr. TRAILL -- The question is whether we can get any part of the expense from Belfast.
Mr. ORR -- That is the question.
Mr. YOUNG -- Is it necessary for your client's interest that the case should be heard at these Assizes? It seems to me to be premature to come before these assizes until you know the actual position in which Mr. Stritch stands.
Mr. M'NEILL -- Let us ask the judge whether the Grand Jury are the right parties to entertain this application.
Mr. ORR -- There is no question whatever about that. You are the only parties to whom he can make the application.
Dr. TRAILL -- You can come up at the next assizes with better information as to the state Mr. Stitch would then be in. It is impossible for this Grand Jury to make a money estimate of the injuries when they have not full information before them.
Mr. ORR -- Juries do it in railway cases everyday.
Sir EDWARD HARLAND -- I think we should ascertain from the judge as to whether Belfast can contribute or not.
Mr. M'NEILL -- I propose that the judge's opinion should be taken upon the matter.
Mr. YOUNG -- I cannot deny the honesty of Mr. Stritch; but it is not the fault of the county. Belfast has not proper powers to give this compensation, but that is no reason why the county should pay for the injury, and therefore I really object.
Mr. M'NEILL -- The Commissioners, in fixing the amount that the borough should pay towards expenses of this class, have omitted this particular item, so that the fault there lies as much on the County Commissioners as on the borough, and that being so, I think we should hear the application. If the borough cannot be called upon to pay its share I do not think the county should be called upon to pay the whole of it. I move that the opinion of the judge be taken as to whether Belfast could be made to pay its share of the expense.
Sir EDWARD HARLAND -- I have great pleasure in seconding that.
The motion was passed.
The Grand Jury then proceeded to the Crown Court to ask the opinion of Judge O'Brien on the matter.
The Grand Jury having come into court,
His LORDSHIP, addressing Mr. Orr, counsel for Mr. Stitch, said he understood that the section of the act of Parliament under which this claim was made was one that dispensed with the usual formality of notice.
Mr. ORR agreed with his Lordship, and said the application was made under that section which gave power to them to grant compensation to peace officers injured in the discharge of their duty, and to levy it either off the entire county or the barony in which the injuries were received. District-Inspector Stitch received his injuries in Durham Street, and there was no question that that was in the barony of Upper Belfast, and there was also no question whatever but that down to the passing of the Borough Act of 1865 the Grand Jury had full power to make a grant of this sort, and levy it off the county or borough as they choose. In that year there was an act passed separating the borough from the county, and that act duly applied to the part of Belfast situated in the County of Antrim. A late act was passed separating the other portion of it from the County Down, but with that they had nothing now to do. Under the Act of 1865 the Grand Jury had no Down, but with that they had nothing now to do. Under the Act of 1865 the Grand Jury had no power to assess taxes on the borough but there were certain payments which the borough was obliged to contribute for general county purposes. And under section 13 of that act the Commissioners were bound to inquire into and award the amount of the contribution to come from the borough, and under section 14 they were bound to inquire and award whether the borough should contribute to any of the expenses which the Grand Jury might have, and which by that act were not expressly taken away. The powers of the Grand Jury in the borough under section 106 are not expressly taken away, and consequently the Commissioners not only can, but he would say ought to have inquired what portion of the expenses the borough should bear under section 106.
His LORDSHIP -- They didn't do that.
Mr. ORR said that was so, and held that the borough was not separated from the county in such matters as these, but only for certain purposes. If the Commissioners, under section 14, did not applot any portion of the expenses under section 106, it must not be assumed they neglected their duty, and that in considering the bargain they make the county outside the borough bear the whole of the expenses.
His LORDSHIP inquired if it was the present contention that the Grand Jury would pass a presentment extending to the whole of the county, but excluding Belfast.
Mr. ORR said that, whether they had power to make the presentment and levy it off the county at large or the Upper Barony of Belfast at large or the Upper Barony of Belfast, Mr. Stitch should not suffer. In any other county there would be no difficulty. He had nothing to do with how it was to be levied; all he wanted was that a presentment be made, and let the county authorities and the town authorities fight it out between them themselves whether the town should contribute or not, and if not let it be levied on the county. He relied on section 14, and he submitted that under section 14, in regard to this matter, the power of the Grand Jury in the borough was not taken away, and it, therefore, remained with the borough as before; and it the Commissioners had not made their award -- and they had not -- the power still remained to charge a proportion on the town. All they had to do was to get the presentment put on the county or the barony of Upper Belfast, and let the county authorities and the Town Council deal with the matter among themselves. The hardship of the case is unspeakable, and this was the only one county in Ireland where Mr. Stritch could not get this presentment.
His LORDSHIP -- If we could make the award, and have it charged on the whole of the county and the town -- but I apprehend that anything in that way would be illegal.
Mr. GERRARD, Q.C., said he appeared for the Grand Jury, and they would be advised by his Lordship whether a legal presentment could be made if they were willing to make a presentment. Under the section 106, it should be a presentment that would be levied off the county at large or off the barony, but, this being in the borough of Belfast, the only presentment that could be made would be one on the borough or the county at large. The only presentment that the judge cold make would be to put it on the county at large or on the barony in which the injuries were received. In either of these cases they would be purporting to raise it off a district of the borough; but other sections prevented this, and took the power from the Grand Jury to levy money from portions of the county within the borough. He considered nothing could be clearer than the language of the acts on this matter. The Commissioners were expressly limited by these acts of Parliament, but they had power to have a revision every five years.
His LORDSHIP -- That's of the amounts, but not of the trusts.
Mr. GERRARD -- So far as the Grand Jury can see. So far as had been presented to them this 106th section, if there was power to entertain it, it never had been entertained by the proper body, and the Grand Jury had nothing to do with it. And no egal presentment could be made in this case no matter how meritorious the case might be.
His LORDSHIP -- Don't the Grand Jury make presentment at the present time that are not levied off the town?
Mr. GERRARD said it was contributed by the town, but not levied. But in this case there would be neither contribution nor levy, and the assess could not be legitimately carried out. It was an unfortunate thing that this gentleman's case came within the 106th section, and the Grand Jury had nothing to do with it.
Mr. ORR said he had only to repeat what he had said before. The powers of the Grand Jury with reference to this particular thing are not taken away either expressly or by implication. If the Commissioners had not entered into this inquiry it was the fault of the Grand Jury. It the Commissioners had not done this they must have either not done their duty, or they had placed the borough under a sufficient tax. And then this was the only place where a police officer could get compensation, in the borough of Belfast.
His LORDSHIP -- Have the jury thought what the amount of compensation should be?
The FOREMAN -- No.
His LORDSHIP said if he made any decision he apprehended it would be final. He saw what Mr. Orr was desirous to have done. He desired him (his Lordship) to direct them to make an award (his Lordship) to direct them to make an award against the whole county, and if Belfast was not to contribute, the result would be that the whole award wold remain on the whole county. He would not now discharge the Grand Jury according to a rule which had become almost universal. He would simply allow them to go away, and inform them when their attendance would be required again. He could ask them at once to consider what amount of compensation Mr. Stritch would be entitled to supposing the amount was coming off the town of Belfast, and at the same time he could ask them to determine what the amount would be supposing the award was not to be levied off the town of Belfast, and if they could not come to a conclusion on that alternative he should reserve the case for the Court of Judges, and have a case stated. His own opinion at present was strongly opposed to the application; but he might change his opinion. He would be under the necessity of giving some consideration to the local acts of Parliament. This case should not be disposed without due consideration, and he would ask them to determine if it would not be well for them to take their time and consider what amount he would be entitled to, supposing it was levied off the whole of the county, excluding Belfast, and supposing it was not excluded.
Dr. TRAILL -- There's another question -- whether it could not be postponed to next year.
His LORDSHIP -- I think you could, certainly.
Mr. GERRARD -- There is no provision fixing the assizes.
His LORDARIP -- The judges have the power to postpone it, and I think it might be the best thing.
Mr. ORR -- I think, indeed, it would be the best.
Dr. TRAILL -- Mr. Orr based his application on the assumption that Mr. Stitch might lose his appointment.
His LORDSHIP -- That's perfectly right, and I'm determined to postpone it. Its a matter of so great importance that it may lead to an amendment of the law.
Mr. ORR -- I'll ask your Lordship to formally adjourn it.
His LORDSHIP then ordered a note of the adjournment of the case to be taken, and, addressing the Grand Jury, said he would not discharge them, as there was an important case, and one which they were not often called on to deal with which they might have to consider. The Grand Jury then retired.
THE SERIOUS CHARGE AGAINST A BARONY SURVEYOR
Mr. CURRIE, solicitor, Ballymena, said he appeared for Mr. Johnston, the barony surveyor, against whom some charges had been made. He was unable to be there on the previous day, and Mr. Johnston had informed him that a committee had been appointed to investigate certain charges which had been preferred against him, and what he wanted now was that he would be allowed to examine some witnesses in reference to the subject matter of these charges. Before they adopted the report of the committee he would ask them to hear these witnesses, both in justice to him (Mr. Currie) and his client.
The FOREMAN said the Grand Jury had not received any report on the matter up to the present.
Mr. YOUNG said Mr. Currie's application resolved itself into this:-- That he wished to have the witnesses examined before the committee itself.
Mr. CURRIE -- Certainly.
Mr. M'NEILL (chairman of the committee) said they only went into one of the allegations against Mr. Johnston, and Mr. Caruth's clients, who had preferred the charge, declined to go into proof of any of the other allegations.
Mr. CURRIE said he apprehended there were certain charges against this man that were the subject matter for inquiry by the committee, and he thought it would be unfair to introduce other charges.
After some further discussion,
The committee that had been appointed to investigate the charges met, and witnesses were examined, Mr. Currie and Mr. Caruth being present.
The committee came to the conclusion that Mr. Johnston hat been guilty of serious dereliction of duty, and that gentleman having tendered his resignation, the Grand Jury decided to accept it.
This concluded the business.
=========================
RIOTING IN MOY, COUNTY TYRONE. -- Yesterday a report reached Armagh city that a riot of a serious nature took place in Moy, in the division of South Tyrone, on Monday night last. The particulars to hand are of a very meagre character, but it appears a collision took place between the Protestants and Nationalists, party feeling being inflamed over the election. It is stated the riot lasted for a considerable time, and that the police charged the Protestants at the point of the bayonet, and that three men were stabbed. A policeman's gun was broken.
=========================
DEATH OF MR. ARTHUR HAMILL, Q.C. -- The death of Mr. Arthur Hamill, Q.C., is announced. Mr. Hamill held the position of County Court Judge and Chairman of Quarter Sessions for the two counties of Sligo and Roscommon. He was called to the Bar in 1853, and took silk in 1869. He had been in failing health for some time. Since his appointment as Chairman, or, according to the present title, County Court Judge, he practised very rarely at the Bar.
=========================
SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE.
Wind-S.S.W.
ARRIVED AT THIS PORT ON THE 22ND INST.
The Lizzie Ellen, Hewitt, fro:n London, with cement.
The Scotia, Edwards, from Carnarvon, with slates.
The ss Delia, Frood, from Glasgow, with coke.
COAL-LADEN VESSELS.
The ss Ardclinis and Dwina, from Ayr; the ss Sylfaen and ss Exchange, from Garston; the ss Morfa, from Swansea; the ss Olderfleet, from Ardrossan, the ss Llewelyn, from Whitehaven; the ss Solway Queen, from Newport.
SAILED FROM THIS PORT ON THE 22ND INST.
The ss Exchange, for Garston; the ss Ardelinis, for Glenarm; the ss Sylfaen, for Llandulas; the ss Olderfleet, for Glasgow; the ss Llewellyn, for Whitehaven; the Balmeuiro, for Glasgow; the Harriet Julia, for Ayr.
ARRIVED
At Wilmington, Cal., on 19th inst., the barque Henry James, Lattimore, of Belfast, from Sydney, N.S.W.
At Marseilles, on 18th inst., the ss Mauritius, Morrow, from Glasgow.
At Liverpool, on 20th inst., the ss Jerome, Crimp, from Cears.
At London, on 20th inst., the ss City of Hamburg, Brownrigg, from Oporto.
SAILED
From Calcutta, on 21st inst., the barque Star of Frin, Belfast, Smyth, for Mauritius.
From Paulliac, on 18th inst., the ss Neptune, Grove, for Nantes.
From Glasgow, on 20th inst., the ss Cormorin, Morrow, for Rouen.
From Swansea, on 90th inst., the ss Auric, Nelson, of Belfast, for Caen.
From Liverpool, on 20th inst., the ss Anselm, M'Cartney, of Belfast, for Para.
PASSED
Dungeness, on 20th inst., the barque Ella Moore, Byers of Belfast, from Charleston for Hull.
-- -- -- -- -- -- --
MAIL AND SHIPPING NEWS.
PLYMOUTH, THURSDAY. -- The Orient line steamer Orient arrived here at 6-30a.m. to-day. Her dates are -- Sydney, June 5th; Melbourne, 12th; Adelaide, 14th; Diego Garcia, 28th; Suez, July 10th; Port Said, 11th; and Naples, 15th. She brought mails and 267,850 specie, after landing which she proceeded for London. The mails were forwarded at 10-35 a.m.
LIVERPOOL, THURSDAY. -- The Anchor line steamer Trinacris, from New York, arrived here this morning.
CALCUTTA, THURSDAY. -- The Peninsular and Oriental Company's steamer Paramatta arrived here yesterday morning from London.
CALCUTTA, THURSDAY. -- The Anchor line steamer Britannia left here this morning for London.
RIO DE JANEIRO, WEDNESDAY. -- The Pacific Company's steamer Valparaiso arrived here to-day from Bordeaux.
MELBOURNE, THURSDAY. -- The Orient Line steamer Austral arrived here this morning from London.
NEW YORK, THURSDAY. -- The Red Star line steamer Wresland arrived here at 4-30 a.m. to-day.
HURST CASTLE, THURSDAY.-- The North-German Lloyds Company's steamer Ems, from New York, passed here at 1-20 p.m. to-day.
NEW YORK, THURSDAY. -- The White Star line steamer Celtic sailed hence to-day for England.
COLOMBO, THURSDAY. -- The Anchor line steamer Karamania arrived here on the evening of the 18th inst., from Glasgow and Liverpool, and left yesterday evening for Calcutta.
PHILADELPHIA, THURSDAY. -- The Red Star line steamer Switzerland arrived here to-day.
QUEENSTOWN, THURSDAY. -- The National line steamer Spain, from Liverpool, arrived here at 2-10 p.m. to-day, and, having embarked despatches, &c., proceeded for New York at 3-10 p.m.
GRAVESEND, THURSDAY. -- The Peninsular and Oriental Company's steamer Ancora, sailing hence for Bombay, takes out specie in bar silver to the value of 261,000.
SOUTHAMPTON, THURSDAY. -- The North-German Lloyd Company's steamer Aller sailed hence for New York at 8 p.m. to-day.
QUEENSTOWN, THURSDAY. -- The American line steamer British King, from Liverpool, arrived here at 5-14 p.m. to-day, embarked despatches, &c., and proceeded for Philadelphia at 5-50 p.m.
CAPETOWN, THURSDAY. -- The Union Company's steamer Trojan arrived here at 2 a.m. to-day from Southampton and Plymouth.
ROCHE'S POINT, TAURSDAY. -- The Guion line steamer Nevada, from New York, arrived here at 9.30 p.m. landed despatches, and proceeded for Liverpool.
CAPETOWN, THURSDAY. -- The New Zealand Shipping Company's steamer Rimalska, from Plymouth, left here to-day for New Zealand.
SUEZ, THURSDAY. -- The British-India steamer Lovdiana left here to-day for Bombay and Kurrachee.
LIVERPOOL, THURSDAY. -- The Hall line steamer Merton Hall left here yesterday for Bombay.
KURRACHEE, THURSDAY. -- The British-India Company's steamer Henzada, from London for Bombay, arrived here last evening.
CAPETOWN, THURSDAY. -- The Messrs. Donald Currie & Company's steamer Garth Castle, with mails for England, sailed at 5p.m. yesterday for Plymouth via Lisbon.
LIVERPOOL, THURSDAY. -- The Harris line steamer Inventor sailed hence to-day for Colon and Panatus direct, calling at Bordeaux on Saturday for supplementary despatches. She takes out mails, &c., for Vera Cruz, Tampico, Progress, and all parts of Central and North and South America.
-- -- -- -- -- -- --
WRECKS AND CASUALTIES.
(FROM LLOYD'S LIST.)
The Norwegian schooner Kaleb, from Macau for Rio Grande, has put into Rio Janeiro, making water, and with the master dead.
A telegram from Terceira, dated Lisbon, July 21st, states that a barque, name unknown, has been picked up, abandoned, water logged, and totally dismasted, and towed into Terceira. All the cargo has been saved, and only a small portion is damaged.
A telegram from Fango states that the steamer Nicosian, previously reported stranded near Fargo, has been floated, and proceeded to Abo.
A telegram from Liverpool, dated July 22nd, reports a large quantity of wreckage coming ashore from the wreck of the steamer Lake Champlain. Wind S.E. strong, with heavy sea.
=========================
PETTY SEDITION.
DUBLIN, THURSDAY -- A crowded meeting was held at Waterford to-night to take steps to compel the Corporation to take down the Royal portraits in the Council Chamber so as to allow of a painting of Thomas Francis Meagher -- one of the '48 men, who was tried for sedition and sentenced to death -- being hung there. The portrait of Meagher was painted in New York, and through Patrick Ford was presented to Waterford, to remain with the Young Ireland Society until the "obnoxious" paintings of the English kings are removed from the Council Chamber, when it is to be placed there. The Mayor presided at the meeting.
=========================
THE ARMY.
[From our Military Correspondent.]
Surgeon-Major W. H. M'Namara lias assumed duty in the Dublin district.
Major J. H. S. Cragie, of the Highland Light Infantry, joins the 1st battalion of the corps located at Belfast, aud takes the place of Lieut.-Colonel Wilson, who goes to India. Major Cragie has just completed his term of service as an instructor at the Royal Military College, and his departure from Sandhurst was much regretted, as he was very popular there.
The 2nd Battalion Yorkshire Regiment, now at Buttevant, will be the first battalion to leave Ireland during the relief season. During the time it has been in the Cork district the corps has been very popular, and the conduct of the men has been most satisfactory.
Colonel H. S. Jones, of the Royal Marines, who commanded the marine battalion in the Egyptian war of 1882, is to be promoted major-general.
An aide-de-campship to the Queen will be vacant by the approaching promotion of Sir Thomas Durand Baker, late of the Royal Irish, to the rank of a general officer, and it is to be given to Colonel F. W. Butler for his services in the Soudan.
In the event of regimental officers other than quartermasters and captains and lieutenants being detained or employed at a military station other than London for a less period than seven days, exclusive of the day of joining or quitting, travelling allowance may be drawn for each day they are detained, provided they are not employed with a battalion of their own regiment.
At the present time there are located in Ireland six strong regiments of cavalry (dragoons and hussars), sixteen batteries of artillery (horse, field, aud garrison), twenty-five battalions of infantry, of which one is a guard battalion and another a battalion of rifles; three companies of Engineers, five companies of the Commissariat and Transport Corps, and four divisions of the Medical Staff Corps. The total strength is about 24,000, officers and men, over 3,000 being cavalry, 1,400 artillery, and about 17,000 infantry, and nearly 2,000 non-combatants, composing the Commissariat aud Medical Staff Corps.
=========================
GIRL CHARGED WITH MURDERING HER BROTHER.
DUBLIN, THURSDAY. -- At the Cork assizes to-day a young girl named Mary Brophy, aged 23, was arraigned before Baron Dowse for the wilful murder of her brother, Timothy Brophy, aged 18, at Blackpool, neat Cork, on the 18th June. It is alleged she attacked him with a hatchet when asleep in revenge for having given her a black eye. There were eighteen wounds on the body. The defence set up is that the deceased was attacked outside by strangers, and crawled into his bed, where he died. The Attorney General conducts the prosecution, and the case has not concluded. The prisoner and deceased were constantly quarrelling.
=========================
ACCIDENT AT LISBURN. -- Yesterday an accident of a rather serious nature occurred on a coalboat lying at the wharf of Messrs. William Barbour & Sons, Hilden. It appears that a few young fellows were amusing themselves on board a lighter, the cargo of which was being discharged, and oue of the lads, named Traynor, happening to be standing near the crane, was severely injured on tbe head by the weight attached to the crane falling on him. The poor little fellow was removed to the County Antrim Infirmary, at Lisburn, where it was ascertained that his injuries are of a very serious character. Dr. St. George, the resident surgeon, had the lad promptly attended to.