Entimations.
A. S. WATSON & CO. [AVE LATELY RECEIVED A SUPPLY
OF THE FOLLOWING
·HAVE
viz:
SCOTT'S ELECTRIC_TOOTH BRUSHES.
SCOTTS ELECTRIC HAIR BRUSHES.
SCOTT'S GALVANIC GENERATORS,
GLASS STOPPERED - GLOVE BOTTLES, TONG A.
FELLOW'S COMPOUND SYRUP
OF
HYPOPHOSEJIFTES.
SAVORY AND MOORE'S PEPTONISED MEAT.
VASELINE SOAL
ROBARES GOLDEN HAIR DYE.
NEW PATTERN-TOOTH BRUSHES.
VIN-SANTE
SUS-ALCO:Taylo STIMULANT CONTAINING
HYPOPHOSPHITES.
A. S. WATSON & Co. GENERAL CHEMISTS
AND
AERATED WATERS
MANGEACABRERS,
HONGKONG DISPENSARY,
BONGKONG,
NOTICES TO CORRESPONDENTS.
[43
It is requestest that all communications rela-
jogo Suliscriptions, Advertisements, N., be ad- deesseltes the Manager, Hongkong Telegraph"
and no to the Eclator.
staff,
.
TO ADVERTISERS.
· Advertisers are requested to forward all notices intended for insertion in that day's issue not later than THREE O'Clock so as not to retard the early publication of the paper,
TO SUBSCRIBERS
Arrangements have been made to publish The Hongkong Telegraph daily at 4 PM. Sub- Scribers in the central districts who do not receive their capies before.Five O'Clock will oblige by at once communicating with the Manager.
The Hongkong Telegraph
HONGKONG, WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 1881.
|
THE HONGKONG TELEGRAPH, WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 1882.
|
on
He did
|
|
|
|
Venice by the company. Mr. Smith then went on to allude to the article written upon the performance of "Narcisse" which the learned counsel said bore evidence of a malicious spirit caused by the withdrawal of Mr. Baumann's important advertisement from the Zelegraph, This was published on the 10th June--the same day as that on which the so called libellous article entitled Tragic Power" was published. Mr. Sunith contended that this notice showed no liance whatever was to be placed on the learned counsel's contention of malice, as the article spoke of the performance as in every way the Best Herr Bandaann had given here. He sub-
not justified. The critique, which was then read, Me: Smith contended, was in no way malicious. The next criticism was on Othello, which ap peared on the 16th June, and the defendant was about to give some explanation with regard to one remarks made regarding Mr. Pinto and the want of an orchestra at the performances, when Mr. Francis objecteil, and His Lordship said he did not see what it had to do with the case.
express his opinions as Mr. Fraser-Smith was in criticism, his critical faculty was so keen, that matter on any man, they could publish in aand in reply and disproof of an attack made critique, anil after that, the critique of the 8th to criticise him. All of them were as per- no one must disagree with him. He (Mfr. Fran- conspicuous place a withdrawal and an apology | upon him by Mr. Nelson, and he was therefore June on the representation of the Merchant of fectly at liberty to criticise Mr. Fraser-Smith's cis) believed editors thought they were in for what they had done. This implied that justified in speaking of them la a newspaper as performance of his self-imposed duties as he was fallible, and dissenters from their views wrong the publication was without malice, and that false and slanderous. The Chief Justice pointed to do so with any one who came on the public headed and stupid, but every editor was open would be all in their favor, that Mr. Fraser- out that the Bishop was justified. It had been stage. Nothing could be more ridiculous or in-
to criticism. He was simply a perfonner on a
Smith had not chosen to avail himself of held that it made no matter whether true or false consistent than Mr. Fraser-Smith's felly in his public stage for money. The object of criminal that privilege, but came to Court persisting by if you believed that your statements were true. silly manifestation of anger because Herr Band-prosecution in cases of libel, and its sole ground, plea of justification that every word was true, and He believed them to be true, and wrote them in many would not agree with him. He criticised were based on the theory that publication of all if he failed in proving truth they would take into vindication of his character as editor of a public Mr. Bandpany, but he would not be criticisal by defamatory libellous matter (ended to a pos- consideration as a proof of deliberate malice that newspaper. There were two ways of instituting any nae else. In point of law and common sense sible breach of the peace, the first impulse of the hat persisted to the bitter end and had failed. action for lilsel, criminal and civil. The prose it was a perfect matter, of indifference, so far, as the person fibelled being to thresh the libeler, The evidence he had to produce would be short cutor posed as a martyr, as a representative of the defendant was concerned, that the article had A defamatory khel was a criminal offence, str. only one, and the reading of the paragraphs he injured innocence, instead of asking for damages been published in other papers. It was not open Fraser-Smith, not content with publishing de hal glanced over. Then it would be for Mr.if wronged, which, if he proved he was libelled, le to Mr. Fraser-Smith to give evidence, and if he famatory matter, tells us why he clid it.
Fraser-Smith to prove the truth of his changes would be justified in receiving were allowed to do so, it would not in- it to provoke. Herr Handmann to commit a breach | by his evidences, when he (Mr. Francis) should He would leave it to the jury, upon what thence the question of bis guilt or inno- of the peace. Mr. Fraucis read another portion be prepared to refute every item of that evidence grounds prosecutor could justify criminal proceed mitted it could not have been written by a per- VALENTIN'S MEAT JUICcence. He must be taken as having fathered of the article and asked if that was fair critician. by calling other evidence. The learned counselings, when civil action would have been his properson who had been actuated by malice in jublish
every statement contained in the article and Was it consistent with Mr. Fraser-Smith's first put in several copies of the Telegraph. | remedy, He could explain. It was done to shuting the article "Tragic Power," Mr. Bandmann made himself responsible for every con- two carefully written criticisms Herr The Chief Justice to defendant.-You don't his (defendant's) moth. He was not allowed to had at that time neted in what he considered an | sequence following on publication." He Mr. Bandmann ? Did it not shew the malice dispute the fact of your being the publisher?-go into the box. No, he knew too much. The ungentlemanly and unprofessional manner by
Francis) would not attempt to weary the
with which it was written, and that the Mr. Fraser-Smith.--Not at all. I admit publi. could go into the box, Mr. Bandmann going about the colony abusing the Trigraph jury by reading over the whole of the article #efendant wrote it under provocation, which was
cation. Mr. Francis said he put in papers very well that no jury would give him for certain criticisms, and withdrawing what he read by the Registrar, but would call special at- that Herr Handmann had disagreed with him? of 7th and 8th June for coast, to shew damages. But no, Mr. D. E. Bandman look called press privileges. He (Mr. Smith) had tention to several portions and ask them to see Mr. Fraser-Smith since then had repeated the change of tone subsequently and malice.Me. criminal proceedings, and closed his (defendant's) | said he did not fect called upon to do anything the connection between it and the article of 14th same charges in a more or less disguised foun. | H. .A. Woolnough, manager of the Hongkong mouth. That was the way this injured man to make Mr. Bandmann's campaign in this June! The gravest charge made against Mr.
Subject to his Lordship's liberty, he would put in Dispensary, was then put in the witness box for came before a jury. What did he ask? To have colony a success, and he did so because Mr. Kannam of being an kabitual woman benter a third article as evidence of express'malice, and the prosecution, aml examines by Mr. Francis. him (the speaker) sent to gael after provoking landmann had expressed a wish to farm out referred to the article on Bert Handimanu in
that defendant was not actuated by a wish for thee deposed he had read the atticle Tragie bin to a breach of the peace. He had arrogantly his four subscription performances and he had Men of the Time," because the stream of the public benefit hut by a malicious desire to injure Power" in the Telegraph of june roth. He had boasted he would have him in gaol; but he (de- thought of taking them up with another gentle- narrative was followed and copied and satirica) Mr. Banduain in every possible way. He must seen it in print before. He had a copy of it on fendung) did not think the Jury would give such man, but after Mr. Bandmann's conduct he in the Telegraph article. The learned counsel reiterate, and enforce them on the public by
a broad sheet of paper. Similar copies had been a verdict as would place him under such a penalty. withdrew from the transaction. The statement real from Tragic Power" where it says that constant repetition. Let them take the 722- circulated in the Colony some three or four weeks The learned counsel had not put a single witness
was therefore made quite harutlessly, and when only three months old, Mr. Bandmann bit graph of June 16th-The Chief Justice asked before it appeared in the Telegraph. He never in the box to prove what he said. The prosecu rough he did not feel called upon to assist his nurse's car, and said that was published to
if it was intended to put these papers in, to which
saw more than one copy here, but had heard of tor was not put in the box.. Did he wish to the financial success of Mr. Bandmann's cam- give emphasis to the charge of being a woman Mr. Francis replied in, the affirmative. The others. The copy he had was lent to him. He virulicate himself from the charge of beating paign, he had 2741 reason, nor would he Ivater and to shew that that wicked, dastardly fearned counselthen read from a paper of June 21st, remenilæered Mr. Fraser-Smith coming to him women, he should be the first to enter the box have been justified in doing anything to pre- spirit was in him at that early age. Three or and said they were distinct repetitions of the before the roth June, two or three days before, and deny everything. In his replication he said vent it. Mr. Smith then read the article. As four times the same charge was emphasised, grossest and foolest of slanders contained in pre-He said he had been told he (witness) had a copy there was no vestige of truth in the statements. It to the notice of the performance of Romeo and but more seriously on the 14th Jane, but vious articles. The readers were referrell back of the skit, and asked him to lend it to him. In would be for the jury to say, after they had heard Juliet," those who had read that beautiful tragedy was that. taken as a whole, fair and legitimate to the charges, the striking parts being put in reply to his enquiry, Mr. Fraser-Smith said he ten or twelve evidences, whether there was any would know that Romen was intended to repre- Echter and wet to individual members of the Mr. Fraser-Smiths own rule laid down in his
Letters on Editorial waters be sent to The criticism of any actor as an actor. Let them take italics (Mr. Francis, read from the paper). Da intended to publish it. He said he had had a truth in the statements or not. Mr. Daniel Ed-sent a young man 17 or 18 years of age, and he the 6th or 7th June Mr. Fraser-Smith classed Mr. copy of his own but had mislaid it. Witness did ward Bandmann was an actor of great notoriety. would ask from the appearance of Mr. Bandmann' Communicativus intended for publication must į article dealing with ferr Banthnann, "Actors as
Basmann with the gentlemen whose names he
not ask him not to publish it. Mr. Fraser-Smith | He was an accomplished gentleman and had as he was present, whether his remarks as to the he arcompanive by the patne and address of the actors are lawful game." Did that article deal read, though he'placed him below Fechter. The said nothing more than what he had stated.
done good service on the stage in his own way. unsuitability of that gentleman for the part were writers, not no essasily for pulification; but as with Mr. Hammany solely as an actor 2. Did it inference was that what Mr. Bandmann had pal- evidence of good faith,
Cross-examined by Mr. Fraser-Smith→→→ don'
He had known him professionally since 1868, Whilst the columns, of the Hongkong Tek-not go back tale details of his life as a boy and as a Irshad was false. Was that fair criticism or a remember the date when you called upon me.
and saw him in his first appearance in "Nar graph will always be open for the bir discussion man? Was that legitimate criticism? We were deliberate attack on a man's character against I cannot say on oath that it was on the morning cisse Mr. Bandmann was very fond of law By compspondents of all questions affecting publicat liberty to criticise, ridicule an actor, but was interests, it must be distinctly understood that that thing "Tragic Power" anything more than
whom Mr. Fraser-Smith had a grudge?” Mr. after "Hamlet" had been played. I can't Courts. He seldom visited a place where he the Editor does not in any way hold himself res-
Francis then referred to the latter which appeared say the exact date, but I know that several had not an action. He was so self-opinionated ponsible for opinions thus expressed.
a deliberate afterupt to throw contempt on Herr in the Telegraph of July 6th under correspondence. days after you called the article appeared in the and so puffed up that he seldom visited a place Handmann quite apart from his ability on the "The heading said the paper was pot responsible graph-Me. Francis said that was the case
where he was not at open warfare with the press. stage. He would submit and ask the jury to find
for the opinions expressed by correspondents, for the prosecution-Mr. Frater-Smith asked in Calcutta, Shanghai, and various places in as a component part of their verdict, that the but they (the jury) would find that Mr. Friser him if he was not going to call the complainant.-Australia Mr. Barabano was always at war with article of 19th june not only contained retain Staith was responsible for giving the letter Mr. Francisreplied "Certainly not."-Mr. Fraser- bis critics. He would read an article from the Mr. Smith said before he could defame a per- defamatory statements with reference to Mr. publicity. He would put in another short mali-Smith.-Then, I will, you may depend upon that. Shanghai Courier of the 2nd June. Mr. Francis son's character, it must be proved that that per- Bandmann's treatment of women, but he would
cious letter. He did not wish to detain them Mr. Fraser-Smith then entered upon his defence. objected, but the objection was overmiled, and son had a character to defame, and it was utterly ask them to say that it was not a proper or longer than he could help. He had endeavored He would endeavor, he said, in a few words, not the following article was read :---
impossible that anything he had written could be legitimate criticism, but only an attempt to bring to put before them the charges against Mr. to waste the time of the Jury, to take away, the
Herr Bandmann holds most peculiar opinions defamatory to Herr Bandmiana. The defendant Mr. Banddmann into ridicule and contempt and injure bin in his profession and reputation. in
Eraser-Smith and the law bearing on the subject. culwebs which the verbosity of the learned
as to the province of true criticism. He is, we then read the whole article, and directly after, The defendant had pleaded two pleas, not guilty, counsel had left on their minds. The learned are constrained to say, very much like a spoilt that which was published on "Dead or Alive" the interval between the roth and 14th June and that the facts were absolutely and in their counsel ipad given them long dissertations on the child, who can take all the treacle that is given on the 21st, the last criticism of the Telegraph ites bad introduced portions of dla Fraser-Smith's entirely true, and that it was for the public bene law of libel, and had given various puzzling hin; but when he is administered a little of the, en Herr Bandmann's acting. The learned criticism of "Narcisse" which gave the key to fit they should be published, but the reasons meanings of the law of defamators libel necessary brimstone with it he is apt to become counsel had contended that these criticism open the locks to his brain and shew the given by him were the very facts themselves from his own standpoint, which was
not the
as rebellious as a refractory infant. Herr Band- showed malice on his part, which arose fram motives actuating him, The article of 14th
which they charged him with having published. the actual point upon which he (the speaker) was
man came here with a greal name and we criti- the withdrawal of Mr. Bandmann's advertise- June, the very opening sentence, without
In the case of the Tieres, the persons defamed arraigned. It was altogether aside from what cised him according to the high position he took, atents from the Telegraph, and he could only any further evidence except Mr. Fraser had been guilty of some acts on the Continent the jury was trying. The learned counsel had and judged of his perforquances according to their say that a more barefaced, scandalous, or atto- Smith's own statement, rendered it unmistakeable and came to England to perpetrate similar acts talked a great deal as to privileged communica-.
true not their sell-rated value. But Herr Band- cious lie was never uttered in a court of justice. that Herr Banduasan and "Trompet Blower there, and so it was for the public interest tion. He (defendant) would base specially his manu appears to have been under the delusion He would prove that the advertisement was not were the same. There was the dat assertion to look into their past and expose them. But defence en privilege, which, they had been we had only his and not the public interests to withdrawn, and the statement of the counsel was that Herr Bandmann had been repeatedly guilty SINGAPORE, 19th July, 11-30 a.st.
had the 77mer no such plea, the verdict would told, belonged to every man, not unly to consult in the matter, and because we exercisedal variance with Mr. Bandmann's affidavit, which of cowardly and conteruptible nects of violence have heen against it. Mr. Fraser-Smith did not The French and Italian fleets have rofused 10 known throughout the world. Suppose he bad
editors of public journals, as hid down in the rights of true criticism and wrote of his perle then handed in. As a matter of fact, Mr. state a single fact as to the necessity for the law books. He believed he was comeet in formances fairly and impartially, giving credit Bandmann's advertisement had never been with- assist Admiral, Seymour to maintain order. A been, what possible public benefit was subserved publication. In fact, that they existed and were saying, and he was open tri the correction of where it was due, and speaking adversely where drawn from the Ifongkeng Telegraph, but had strong farce under the command of Arabi Bey is hy the publication? None, he submitted. The at Kafredour. The Egyptian troups are demora-only possible object was to irretrievably injure
true was the only reason given for those state- His Lordship if it was not so, that the statements it was absolutely necessary, Herr Bandmann be been continued for the time for which it was or lized.
ments. He believed he could have demurred to he bad made were privileged, unless the jury were haved in the undignified and petulant manner dered. Mr. Smith pointed out that the advertise- Herr Bandmann in public estimation and pre-
the pleas as insufficient, laut issue had been taken satisfied that express malice was used in their above referred to. In his wrath, he fulminated went announced that the company consisted of rent people attending or patronizing his perform on the facts and there the matter remained. He publicaution, and of that, he submitted, there was, an interdict against the Courier and suspended twelve artistes, which Mr. Bandmann's affidavit ances. He would ask the juny to compare the would ask his Lordship to direct that the justifien at present no evidence before the jury. He be the use of press rights in respect to the represent proved to be false, as he there stated the number first articles before Mr. Fraser-Smith's self-love
tion of Mr. Fraser-Smith, and the facts he asserted heved therefore his Lordship world direct them atives of this paper attending the theatre. In of his actors was hine. The defendant alluded had been hurt because Mr. Bandiñann did not agree with him. He spoke then of Mr. Bandiain the jury tafind a verdict in his favor. The question be their duty to bring in a verdict of not guilty. has quite mistaken, if not forgotten, his position published in the Telegraph of the 21st June, to exist, were not sufficient in point of law to enable that there was no case against him, and it would doing this Herr Bandmann has shown that he to a paragraph concerning Herr Bandmann, as an eminent actor in his profession. Mr. Fraser wouldbe, did Mr. Fraser-Smith publish the article. The one great case on which he intended to base as a public nian, and our duty as journalists. which he said the learned counsel had com Smith had not only asserted that Here Bandmann The proof of publication was a mere matter of his defence was well known, having been printed That gentleman should remember that it is per-plained of as malicious, which simply contained was habitually guilty of violence to women and dead. The next questions would be, are these in the Law Reports of the Privy Council, vol. 4. fectly immaterial to us whether he suspends the extracts from a pamphlet which Mr. Bandmann children, but also gave the statement the addi- tional weigh: of his own personal experience. He
articles defumatory in their character? Do they It was the case of "Laughton v the Bishop of usual courtesies that are extended to the press or had published concerning himself-a species accuse Herr Bandmann of crime for which he Sodor and Man. In this case Mr. Laughton, a not, as we only visit that place as a matter of of trumpet blowing much in vogue among pm. put it before the public as if he (Mr. Fraser- would be accountable to the laws of the country? barrister, attacked the Bishop of the diocese, and duty to the public who require a criticism on the fessional men, especially peripatetic actors of Smith) had personal knowledge of some such Do they state things of him tending to injure him used some very strong language with regard to a performance from those that reflect and often The Bandmann type, scenes of violence as those he was referring to. in his profession of actor and prevent him from bill the latter was endeavouring to pass in the House | lead public opinion. A journalist has to perform Mr. Francis here read from the article of 14th
oblaining eniployment in that line? Is there of Keys in that island. The Bishop, in raply to many duties of a pleasant and of a a very un- A CORRESPONDENT writes: "Revolutionary June in reference to Herbert Crellin, and said direct intention to bring Mr. Bandmann into this nutack, used the strongest posible language plessant nature, and because sometimes he is ideas are going forward. The Macaente, a weekly that it was anutterly false and malicious statement. newspaper of the neighbouring colony, proclaims it was incumbent on Mr. Fraser-Sinith to prove
hatred, ridicule and contempt in the eyes of the with regard to his assailant, 'called him most in- | called on to execute tasks that fall within the The defendant, after some further remarks on that the best system of government for Macao its truth. He had, without any public grounds, Smith formed, in the opinion of the jury, almost as
public? If all that had been said by Mr. Fraser famous names, and villified and abused him latter category it is no reason why he should this subject, went on to say that until he heart is, as it thinks, that which is based on the Com-published it maliciously, and gave it strength and
far as the English language forget his position. It may and be always an un- the speech of the learned counsel for the prose criticism of an
acnt actor--if they thought he would allow and mune, and considers as the greatest source of force as if he had direct knowledge from one of
ณ copy of this alloyed source of pleasure to dì through dreary cution, he had never imagined he could be ac its evils and the cause of its decay, the system the actors in the
put it forward bond fide and honestly as speech to the newspapers. A civil action was dramatic performances, and to visit a theatre cused of such tremendous audacity and villainy scene." Herr, Bandunarn adopted by the Portuguese Government of send- knew such a
a priticism, however ridiculous and non- brought against him, and the Jury returned under unpleasant circumstances; but since it is with regard to the article "Tragic Power." It ing from the metropolis the leading officials, in- but he
person as Herbert Crellin, sensical it might be, if they thought it was a verdict for the plaintiff with 400 damages. expected that a critic should exercise his functions was, however, only such an article as could be was sever connected with the said honestly, and fairly to criticise an actor, This was in 1870, and the decision was appealed "through good report and ill," our representa-cen every week in the English comic papers. cluding the Governor. According to the Jaca-Lyceum when Herr Bandmann was, and Mr. possibly Mr. Fraser-Smith's plea would enable against, and the judgment of the lower count was tive was present in an official capacity in the He submitted that though certainly he was just ense, Macao would thrive astonishingly were the Bandmann indignantly denied he ever laid his them to find a verdict in his favor. But he sub-reversed, it being held that the statements made theatre last night. With these preludial remarks, as responsible for that article as if he had written Municipal Chamber charged to manage the hand on a woman, or was threshed by Herbert mitted it far exceeded the bounds of legitimate and published by the Bishop wek privileged un finances of the colony, and to direct all its home Crellin or any one else. Mr. Francis then read
which the conduct of Herr Bandmann has forced himself, yet itonglit not to be taken in connection criticism. The greater portion was concerned less it was satisfactorily established that they us to make, we shall now give as usual our with the paragraph which he afterwards wrote. - affairs, as well as the relations with the Chinese the part of the article relating to the Portuguese with Mr. Bandmann's private life behind the were made from express malice, and the burden opinion on last night's performance." authorities. It is assumed that the Members of youth, and said, suppose it actually occurred that
He then put in the pamphlet form of "Tragio the Senate, instead of being led astray by local he had been kicked off the stage, and that Herr
scenes and his connection with his company, If of the proof of express malice lay upon the plain- That was the paragraph which appeared in the Power," which he pointed out bore the Calcutta the defendant had exceeded fair bounds, bis tiff. The court was of opinion that there was no Courier on and Juno and which related to an pastimark, and probably came from Dave Car and relational influences, would be a corporation Bardmann made use of threats against Mr. privilege was gone. He asked the jury to say, evidence of express malice, and they found a incident similar to the difference with the Zele son, formerly a partner of the prosecutor, composed of men having permanent interests in Fraser-Smith, no public interest, he put it, was the city, and their own families to advise and to be subserved by publishing it in a newspaper. declamation to persons in Hongkong, that it was
from the excess, from Mr. Fraser-Smith's own verdict for the defendant. This was again ap.graph. On the 6th June the Bandmann-Ilcaude! The defendant thought the conduct of the proso." lead them in any great crisis. It does not suit. The Portuguese youth had the Police Court and
pealed against, and came before the Privy Coun- troupe appeared at the City Hall in "Hamlet" Hecution in preventing him from giving evidence, them to have a Governor, nor other functionaries the Summary Court open to him, and if Mr. Fraser attempt on Herr Bandmann's character in e-
not intended to be fair criticism but a malicious cil, and it was there held that the communication was acquainted with Mr. Bandmann and received and keeping Mr. Bandmann out of the box, sa come over from Portugal. Should these ideas Smith was threatened, he also had the Police Court sentment, and was done wickedly and maliciously nary sense of the word, the Bishop having an In-aent at the performance and wrote the article of must weaken the case for the prosecution. sent to the newspapers was privilaged in the ordi- the courtesies extended to the press. He was pre. that he could not cross-examine that gentleman, succeed in going further than the columns of the
open to him and could have taken proceedings to injure Mr. Bandmann.. They were at liberly Macaense, we shall have in a short time near us
terest in putting forward an explanation of his con- the 7th June. He was sorry to take up time, showed fear with regard to the chargo to protect himself. The publication subserved no public object whatever. He would also put Smith's motive. If they thought the defendant in the case, and the previous decision was upheld. learned counsel, who wanted to prove malice, good faith.
to consider other articles put in and Mr. Fraser duct to the clergy and others who took deep interest but he was forced to do so by the action of the made against them-made soud fide, and in it that if the jury thought some slight object was actuated by malice and not bona fide, then
He could have easily proved his He would argue shortly that he, in the same sense wilful, wicked and direct malice. He would charge with regard to the notorious Rousby might be subserved by the publication of what if they found actual malice, no question of pri- as the Bishop, had manifestly an interest in have to read the article to shew the jury that case had this case been tried in London, but occurred behind the scenes, yet Mr. Fraser-Smith vilage could arise, as His Lordship would direct defending himself against foul, malicious and throughout he had used the same tone. Mr. as he was 10,000 miles away, he was not in a published it to hurt Herr Bandmann, and he them. The right to qualified privilege in this cowardly imputations which had been made re- Bandmann was praised in every performance and position to do so. What he believed to be the would ask the jury to draw that conclusion, be- case depended entirely on the co-existence in the gading himself to his clients the public of Hong- censured also. He thought when they heard the correct version of that case was that a rehearsal cause if Mr. Fraser-Smith's object was to give a mind of the writer of a boira fide honest intention; kong. This prosecution had been undertaken in article they must put away the suggestion that was going on at the Queen's Theatre at which truthful narrative, he far exceeded privilege in Continuing from where we were obliged to leave dragging into the article all sorts of charges might claim, he thought His Lordship would tell principle, and bad in fact; and he' should prove (Mr. Frier-Smith read portion of article of 7th Rously to knock a book out ofher hand. There but if malicious, whatever privilege defendant a vindictivo spirit, and was bad in law, bad in malice was to be inferred from those, criticisms, Mr. Bandmann lifted up his hand and struck Mrs. off in our yesterday's issue, Mr. Francis went on against Herr Bandmann. to say that the defendant opened out a defamatory in every possible way to ridicule and con-
He held him up them they must find him guilty. Mr. Fraser it so. He would point out that in the case June relating to Mr. Dandmann), That was the were several witnesses to prove that Mrs. Rousby Smith was not content to plead not guilty, but which he had referred to, the Bishop had gone criticism of Herr Bandinann's "Hamlet" which was knocked down and hurt, but the case was libel circulating in the Colony and gave it pub-tempt, and exceeded privilege in every pos- said by his second plea that every one of the state considerably further than was necessary for self the learned counsel had characterised as perfectly dismissed because Mrs. Rousby had shown her licity, not only that, but at intervalssince referred sible way. Mr. Francis read a portion of in different articles and critiques to that article, the article, and said the jury would see that the verdict must go against him.
ments was true. If he failed to prove every one, defence, but his communicatione had been held fair and impartial, and in other words his (defen am covered with bruises, which she alleged reviving it in the mind of readers. One word in the defendant repeated and emphasized the failed in his proof of any plea he was lost and out. A case was heard some time ago, Nel. In these critiques, however, he had simply dealt maan called her servant to prove that many of If he to be privilged, and express malice not made dant's) modesty would not allow him to repeat were caused by the defendant; and Mr. Band- reference to Mr. Bandmann in that matter. Mr. charges and adled every epithet of contempt must be found guilty on the charges. He must son persuz Pitman, in which Mr. Francis with Mr. Bandmann in the same way as in the the bruises were caused by a fall downstairs Fraser-Sunith was just as much a performer on and ridicule. If there was any privilege, it was not only prove their truth, but must shew public was counsel for the defence, and in which he succeeding ones, which the prosecation claimed when that lady went home somewhat the worse the public stage as Herr Bandinann. They could far exceeded by the manner and mode adopted. benefit. He submitted there was not a shadow enunciated views in striking contradiction and showed matice; he had both praised and cen for drink. Mr. Baudmann had, not said whe criticise him as much as he could criticise them: He dressed the charges up and colored them to of public benefit shown. There was one priri-striking dissimilarity to those he now put forward sured every performance, and he had severely ther or not he had been proceeded against If he was at liberty to criticise Mr. Bandmann, injure' Herr Bandmann because that gentleman lege possessed by editors of newspapers that they The learned counsel then submitted to the jury censured the acting of Mr. Bandmann both as civilly in that case. That was his version Mr. Baudmann was as thoroughly at liberty to had disagreed with him. He was so omniscient had not. After they had published libellous that what Mr. Pitman wrote was in self defence, Hamlet and Shylock.. Mr. Smith then read the of the case which, had he been in London,
TELEGRAM S.
LOCAL AND GENERAL.
A CORRESPONDENT asked us the other day what was the fastest time ever made by a steamer between Hongkong and San Francisco. The City of Peking steamed from Hongkongte Yokohama in 4 days, 19 hours, and from Yokohama to San Francisco in 10 days 19 hours and 8 minutes. The fastest run from Yokohama to San Francisco was made by the denie, her time being 14 days 9 hours. The City of Peking's lastest time is 14 days 15 hours.
a new Republic of Andorra under the protection of the government.. that is, of the mandarins
of Canton,"
SUPREME COURT.-CRIMINAL
SESSIONS.
THE TELEGRAPH LIBEL CASE.
His Lordship pointed out that it was some thing more than the, extracts, it was the remarks of which complaint was made,..