Entimations..
A. S. WATSON & CO.
AVE LATELY RECEIVED A SUPPLY
OF THE FOLLOWING viz :
HAVE
SCOTT'S ELECTRIC TOOTH BRUSHES.
SCOTTS ELECTRIC HAIR BRUSHES.
SCOTT'S GALVANIC GENERATORS.
GLASS STOPPERED GLOVE BOTTLES,
TONG A.
FELLOW'S COMPOUND SYRUP
or
HYPOPHOSPHITES.
JUICE.
VALENTIN'S
MEAT
SAYORY AND MOORE'S
MEAT.
A
PEPTONISED
VASELINE SOMP. ROBARE'S GOLDEN HAIR DYE.
NEW PATTERN TOOTH BRUSHES.
VIN-SANTĘ
made
THE HONGKONG TELEGRAPH, WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 1882.
SUN-MAPHILIC STIMULANT, CONTAINING | June, The gravest charge made against Mr.
HYPOPHOSPUITES.
A. 5. WATSON & Co. GENERA 1. CHEMISTS AND
AERATED WATERS
HONGKONG DISPENSARY,
MANUFACTURERS,
HONGKONG,
XOTICES TO CORRESPONDENTS,
It is reputed that all communications rela- Linggo Subscriptions, Advertisements, &c., be ad- dressed wathe Manager, Hongkong Telegraph"
and not to the Editor.
starf.
Letters on Lalitorial matics to be sent to The Editor" and, not to individual members of the “Commmunizations intended for publication must be accompanied by the mume and address of the weilers, not necessary for publication; but as evidence of gigt faith,
Wantst de Comes of the flongkong Tele graple will always be open for the tai discussion by corespondents of all questions secting public interests, it must be distinctly understood that the Edikar does not in any way hold himself res- ponsible for opinions thus expressed.
himself responsible for every con- sequence following on publication. He (Mr. Francis) would not attempt to weary the jury by reading over the whole of the antide read by the, Registrar, but would call special at. tention to several portions and ask them to see the connection between it and the article of 14th
Handainn of being an habitual woman beater referred to the article on Herr Handmana in "Men of the Time," because the stream of the narrative was followed and copied and satirized in the Telegraph article. The learned counsel read from "Tragic Power" where it says that when only three months old, Mr. Bandmanu sit | [431 his nurse's car, and said that was published to give emphasis to the charge of being a woman beater and to shew that that wicked, dastardly spirit was in him at that early age. Three or four times the same charge was comphasised, but more seriously on the 14th June, but was that, taken as a whole, fair and legitimate criticism of any actor as an actor. Let them take Mr. Fraser-Smiths' own rule laid down in his article dealing with Herr Handmann, Actorsas actors are lawful game." Did that article deal with Mr. Bantam solely as an actor ? Did it not go back intodetails of his life as a hoy and as a man? Was that legitimate criticisin? We wre at liberty to criticise, ridicule an actor, but was that thing Tragic Power" anything more than a deliberate attempt to throw contempt on Herr Bandmann quite apart from his ability on the stage. He would subunit and ask the jury to ind as a component part of their verliet, that the; article of toth June not only contained curtain defamatory statements with reference to Mr. Bandmann's Treatment of women, but he would ask them to say that it was not a proper or legitimate criticism, but only an attempt to bring Mr. Bandmann into ridicule and contempt and injure him in his profession and reputation. In the interval between the roth and 14th June they had introduced portions of Mr. Fraser-Staith's criticism of "Narcisse" which gave the key to open the lock to his brain and shew the motives actuating him. The article of 34th June, the very opening sentence, without ány further evidence except Mr. Fraser- Smith's own, statement, rendered it unmistakeable that Hers Bandmann and "Trumpet Blower" were the sanie. There was the that assertion that Berr Bandmann had been repeatedly guilty of cowardly “and contemptible acts of violence known throughout the world. Suppose he had been, what possible public benetit was subserved
TO ADVERTISERS. Advertiums are requested to forward all notices intended for insextion in that day's issue not later than Tax Check so as not to retard the cuły publication of the paper,
TO SUBSCRIBERS,
Arrangements have been made to publish The Hongkong Telegraph daily at 4 1.31. Sub. scribers in the central districts who do not receive
their copies before Five O'Clock will oblige by at once Communicating with the Manager.
The Hongkong Telegraph
HONÁRUSU, "WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 1882,
|
on Herr
matter on any man, they could publish in a and in reply and disproof of an attack made conspicuous place a withdrawal and an apology for what they had done. This implied that the publication was without mualice, and that
critique, 'and after that, the critique of the Sth upon him by Mr. Nebon, and he was therefore June on the representation of the Merchant of justified in speaking of then in a newspaper as Venice by the company. Mr. Smith then went false and slanderous. The Chief Justice pointed on to allude to the article written upon the would be all in their favor. Bu Mr. Fraser- out that the Bishop was justified. It hail been performance of "Narcisse" which the learned Smith had not chosen to avail himself of held that it made no matter whether true or false
counsel said bore evidence of a malicious spirit that privilege, but canie to Court persisting by if you believed that your statements were true. caused by the withdrawal of Mr. Bandmann's plea of justification that every word was true, and He believed them to be true, and wrote them in important advertisement from the Telegraph. if the faitesi in proving truth they would take into vindication of his character as editor of a public This was published on the roth June the same consideration as a proof of deliberate malice that newspaper. There were two ways of instituting day as that on which the so called libellous he had persisted to the bitter cad and had failed action for libel, criminal and civil. The prose article entitled Tragic Power" was published. The evidence he had to produce would be shortcutor posed as a martyr, as a representative of Mr. Smith contended that this notice showed no only one, and the reading of the paragraphs he injured innocence, instead of asking for damages reliance whatever was to be placed on the fearned had glanced over. Then it would be for Mr. if wronged, which, if he proved he was libelle, he counsel's contention of malice, as the article Frase-Smith to prove the truth of his changes would be justitied in receiving.
spoke of the performance as in every way the He would leave it to the jury, upon what by his evidences, when he (Mr. Francis) should
best Herr Bandmann had given here. He sub- be prepared to refute every item of that evidence grounds prosecutor could justify criminal procecil-mitted it could not have been written by a per- by calling other evidence. The learned counselings, when civil action would have been his proper son who had been actuated by malice in publish- put in several copies of the Telegraph. remedy. He could explain. It was done to shuting the article. "Tragic Power" Mr. Banduann The Chief Justice to defendant.---You don't his (defendant's) mouth. He was not allowed to had at that time acted in what he considered an dispute the fact of your being the publisher? go into the box. No, he knew too much. If he ungentlemanly and unprofessional manner by Mr. Fraser-Smith-Not at all. I admit pubt. could go into the box, Mr. Banduan knew going about the colony abusing the Telegraph cation.~Mr. Francis said he put in papers very well that no jury would give him for certain criticismas, and withdrawing what he of 7th and 8th June for contrast, to show damages. But no, Mr. D. E. Bandujan took called press privileges. He (Mr. Smith) had change of tone subsequently and malice.-Mr. criminal proceedings, and closed his (defendant's) said he did not feel called upon to do anything H. A. Woolnough, manager of the Hongkong mouth. That was the way this injured man to make Mr. Bandmann's campaign in this 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. the prosecution, and examined by Mr. Francis.im (the speaker) sent to gaol after provoking Bandinanu had expressed a wish to farm out He deposed he had read the article "Tragic in to a breach of the peace. He had arrogantly his four subscription performances and he had Power" in the Telegraph of June 16th. He had bousted he would have him in gaul; but be (de thought of taking them up with another gentle- seen it in print before. He had a copy of it on fendant) did not think the Jury would give such man, but after Mr. Bandmann's conduct he a broad street of paper. Similar copies had been a verdict as would place him under such a penalty. withdrew from the transaction. The statement circulated in the Colony some three or four weeks "The learned counsel had not put a single witness was therefore made quite harmicasly, and before it appeared in the Telegraph. He never
in the box to prove what he said. The prosecu- through he did not feel called upon to assist 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. Bandatia's cam- others. The copy he had was lent to him. He vindicate himself from the charge of beating paign, he had no remembered Mr. Fraser-Smith coming to him women, he should be the first to enter the box have been justified in doing anything to pre- before the 10th June, two or three days before, and deny everything. In his replication he said vent it. Mr. Smith then read the article. As 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 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 reply to his enquiry, Mr. Fraser-Smith said he ten or twelve evidences, whether there was any
would know that Romeo was intended to repre- intended to publish it. He said he had had truth in the statements or not. Mr. Daniel Ed-sent a young man 17 or 18 years of age, and he 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 nost nak him not to publish it. Mr. Fraser-Smith He was an accomplished gentleman and had said nothing more than what he had stated. dong good service on the stage in his own way. He had known him professionally since 1868, and saw him in his first appearance in "Nat- isse." Mr. Banduaan was very fond of law Counts, He selden visited a place where he had not an action. He was so self-opinionated and so puffed up that he seldom visited a place where he was not at open warfare with the press, In Calcutta, Shanghai, and various places in Australia Mr. Bandmann was always at war with his critica. He would read an article from the Shanghai Courier of the and June.-Mr. Francis objected, but the objection was overruled, and the following article was read ---
a
Cross-examined by Mr. Fraser-Smith.—I don' remember the date when you called upon me. I cannot say on oath that it was on the morning after "Hamlet" had been played. I can't say the exact date, but I know that several days after you called the article appeared in the | Telegraph.--Mr. Francis said that was the case for the prosecution-Mr. Fraser-Smith asked him if he was not going to call the complainant. Mr. Francisreplied "Certainly not."--Mr. Fraser- Suits. Then I will, you may depend upon that. Mr. Fraser-Smith then entered upon his defence. He would endeavor, he said, in a few words, not
|
reason, nor would be
as he was present, whether his remarks as to the unsuitability of that gentleman for the part were not justified. The critique, which was then read, Mr-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 some remarks made regarding Mr. Pinto and the want of an orchestra åt the performances, when Mr. Francis objected, 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 to criticise him. All of them were as per no one must disagree with him. He (Mr. Fran- fectly at liberty to criticise Mr. Fraser-Smith's cis) believed editors thought they were in performance of his self-imposed duties as he was fallible, and dissenters from their views wrong to do so with any one who came on the public headed and impid, but every editar was open stage. Nothing could be more ridiculous or in- to criticism. He was simply a performer on a consistent than Mr. Fraser-Smith's fally in his public stage for money. The object of criminal silly manifestation of anger because Herr Baud-prosecution in cases of libel, and its sole ground, mann would not agree with him. He criticised were based on the theory that publication of all Mr. Bandmann, but he would not be criticised by defamatory libellous matter tended to a pos any one else. In point of law and common sense sible breach of the peace, the first impulse of it was a perfect matter of indifference, so far as the person libelled being to thresh the libeller. the defendant was concerned, that the article had a defamatory libel was a criminal offence. Mr. been published in other papers. It was not open Fraser-Smith, not content with publishing de- to Mr. Fraser-Smith to give evidence, and if hefamatory-matter, tells us why he did it. He did were allowed to do so, it would not in-
it to provoke Herr Bandmann to commit a breach thence the question of his guilt or into- of the peace. Mr. Francis read another portion cence, He must be taken as having fathered of the article and asked if that was fait criticisin. every statement contained in the article and Was it consistent with Mr. Fraser-Sinith's first
two carefully written criticisms Bandmann ? Did it not show the malice with which it was written, and that the defendant wrote it under provocation, which was that Here Baulians had disagreed with him? Mr. Fraser-Smith since then had repeated the same charges in a more or less disguised form. Subject to his Lordship's liberty, he would pat in a third article as evidence of express malice, and that defendant was not actuated by a wish for the public benefit but by a malicious desire to injure Mr. Bandmann in every possible way. He must reiterate, and enforce them on the public by constant repetition. Let them take the Fefe graph of June 16th--The Chief Justice asked if it was intended to put these papers in, to which Mr. Francis replied in the affirmative.--The learned counsel then read from a paper of June 21st, and said they were distinct repetitions of the grossest and foulest of slanders contained in pre- vious articles. The readers were referred back to the charges, the striking parts being put in italies (Mr. Francis read from the paper). On the 6th or 7th June Mr. Fraser-Smith classed Mr. Bandmann with the gentlemen whose names he read, though he placed him below Fechter. The inference was that what Mr. Bandmana had pub- hosted was false. Was that fair criticism or a deliberate attack on a man's character against whom Mr. Fraser-Smith had a grudge? Mr. Francis then referred to the letter which appeared in the Telegraph of July 6th under correspondence. The heading said the paper was not responsible for the opinions expressed by correspondents, but they (the Jury) would find that Mr. Fraser-
Mr. Smith said before he could defanie a per. Smith was responsible for giving the letter publicity. He would put in another short pinli
son's character, it must be proved that that per cinus letter. He did not wish to detain them
son had a character to defime, and it was utterly longer than he could help. He had endeavored
impossible that anything he had written could be to put before them the charges ́against Mr. to waste the time of the Jury, to take away the
"Herr Bandonann holds must peculiaropinions defamatory to Herr Bandmann. The defendant Fraser-Smith and the law bearing on the subject. colwebs 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" and that the facts were absolutely and in their counsel had 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 entirety uue, and that it was for the public bene- law of libel, and had given' various puzzling him; but when he is administered a little of the
on Herr Bandmann's acting. The learned fit they should be published, but the reasons meanings of the law of defamatory Hitel necessary brimstone with it he is apt to become counsel had contended that these criticisms given by him were the very facts themselves from his own standpoint, which was not the as rebellious as a refractory infant. Here Band-showed malice on his part, which arose from which they charged him with having pablished. the actual point upon which he (the speaker) was
man came here with a great name and we criti- the withdrawal- of Mr. Båndmann's advertise. In the case of the Times, the persons defamed arraigned. It was altogether aside from what cised him according to the high position he took, ments from the Telegraph, and he could only had been guilty of some acts on the Continent the jury was trying. The learned counsel had and judged of his performances according to their say that a more barefaced, scandalous, or atro. and came to England to perpetrate similar acts talked a great deal as to privileged communicatru not their self-rated value. But Herr Band- cious lie was never uttered in a court of justice. there, and so it was for the public interest tion. 11g (defendant) would base specially his mann appears to have been under the delusion He would prove that the advertisement was not to look into their past and expose them. But defence on privilege, which, they had - been
we had only his and not the public interests to withdrawn, and the statement of the counsel was had the 7imus no such plea, the verdict would told, belonged to every man, not only to consult in the matter, and because we exercised at variance with Mr. Dandmann's affidavit, which have been against it. Mr. Fraser-Smith did not editors of public journals; as laid down in the rights of truc criticism and wrote of his per- he 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 correct in formances fairly and impartially, giving credit Bandmann's advertisement had never been with- publication. In fact, that they existed and were saying, and he was open to the correction of where it was due, and speaking adversely where drawn from the Hongkong Telegraph, but Ind by the publication? Nome, he submitted.. The 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 only possible object was to irretrievably injurements. He believed he could have demurred to he had made were privileged, unless the jury werehaved in the undignified and petulant manner dered. Mr. Smith pointed out that the advertise. Herr Bandasann in public estimation and pre- the pleas as insufficient, but issue had been taken satisfied that express malice was used in their above referred to. In his wrath, he fulminated ment announced that the company consisted of vent people attending of patronizing his perform--| on ille facts and there the matter remained. He publication, 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 jasy to compare the world ask his lordship to direct that the justiñca- at present no evidence before the jury. He be
the use of press rights in respect to the represent proved to be faise, 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 level therefore his Lordship would direct them atives of this paper attending the theatre. In of his actors was nine. The defendant alluded had been hurt because Mr. Bandmann did not toexist, werent 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, agree with him. He spoke then of Mr. Bandmann the jury to find 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 stat June, as an eminent actor in his profession. Mr. Fraser would be, clid Mr. Eraser-Smith publish the article.
The one great case on which he intended to base as a public man, and our duty as journalists. which he said the learned counsel had com Smith had nut only asserted that Herr 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 detail. The next questions would be, are those in the Law Reports of the Privy Council, vol. 4. feetly immaterial to us whether he suspends the extracts from a pamphlet which Mr. Bandmann children, but also gave the statement the addi- articles, defamatory in their character? Do they
It was the case of "Laughton v. the Bishop of usual courtesics that are extended to the press or had published concerning himself-a species. tional weight of his own personal experience. He accuse Herr Bandmann of crime for which he Soder and Man." In this case Mr. Laughton, anot, as we only visit that place as a matter of of trumpet blowing much in vogue among pro- put it before the public as if he (Mr. Fraser- would be accountable to the laws of the country? barrister, altacked the Bishop of the diocese, and duty to the public who require a criticismp on the Smith) had personal knowledge of some sich 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 scenes of violence ae those he was referring to. in his profession of actor and prevent him from bill the latter was endeavouring to pass in theHorse lead public opinion. A journalist has to perform Mfr. Francis here read from the anicle of lith obtaining employment in that line? Is there of Keys in that island. The Bishop, In reply to many duties of a pleasant and of a a very un- June in reference to Herben Crellin, and said direct intention to bring Mr. Bandmann imo this attack, uspe the strongest possible language pleasant nature, and because sometimes he is that it was an utterly false and malicious statement. 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 it was incunalien: on Mr. Fraser-Smith to prove public? If all that had been said by Mfr. Fraser 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 its truth. He had, without any public grounds, Smith formed, in the opinion of the jury, almost as far as the English language forget his position.. It may not be always an un- the speech of the learned counsel for the prose published it maliciously, and gave it strength and criticisms of an actor-if they thought he would allow and sent a copy of this alloyed source of pleasure to sit through dreary cution, he had never imagined he could be ace force as if he had direct knowledge from one of put it forward bond fide and honestly as speech to the newspapies. A civil action was dramatic performances, and to visit a theatre cused of mich tremendous audacity and villainy the actors in the SCORE. Herr Bandann 1 criticism, 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 knew such a person as Herben 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 but he Was never connected with the said honestly and Girly to criticise an actor, This was in 1870, and the decision was appealed "through good report and ill," our representaseen every week in the English comic papers. Lyceum when Herr Banddmann was, and Mr.possibly Mr. Fraser-Smith's plea woukt enable against, and the judgment of the lower court was five was present in an official capacity in the He submitted that though certainly he was just Bandmann indignantly denied he ever laid his them to find a verdict in his favor. But he sub. revered, it being held that the statements made theatre last night. With these preludial remarke, as responsible forthat article as if he had written hand on a woman or was threshed by Herbert mitted it far exceeded the bounds of legitimate and phlished by the Bishop were privileged un which the conduct of Herr Bandmann has forced ithimself, yet it ought not to be taken in connection Crellin or any one else. Mr. Francis then read 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. the part of the article relating to the Portuguese with Mr. Handmann's private life behind the
were made from express malice, and the burden opinion on last night's performance."
Ho then put in the pamphlet form of “Tragic youth, and said, suppose it actually occurred that scenes and hir 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 he had been kleked off the stage, and that Herr the defendant had exceeded fair bounds, his liff. The court was of opinion that there was no Courier on and June and which related to an postmark, and probably came from Dave Car- Bandmann made use of threats against Mr. privilège was gone. He asked the jury to say,
evidence of express malice, and they found a incident similar to the difference with the Trip | son, formerly a partner of the prosecutor, Fraser-Smith, no public Interest, he put it, was from the excess, fron Mr. Fraser-Smith's own yerdict for the defendant. This was again ap graph. On the 6th June the Bandmann-Beaudet The defendant thought the conduct of the prose to be subserved by publishing it in a newspaper. declaration to persons in Hongkong, that it was
pealed against, and came before the Privy Coun-troupe appeared at the City Hall in "Hamlet," Hecution in preventing him from giving evidence, The Portuguese youth had the Police Court and 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. Handmann out of the box, so the Summary Court open to him, and if Mr. Fraser- attempt on Herr Randmann's character in re sentto the newspapers was privileged in the ordi- the courtesies extended to the press. He was pre- that he could not cross-examine that gentleman, 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- sent at the performance and wrote the article of must weaken the case for the prosecution, open to him and could have taken proceedings to injure Mz Bandenpnn. They were at liberty
terest in putting forward an explanation of his con- the 7th June. He was coury to take up time, It showed fear with regard to the charge- to protect himself. The publication subserved to consider other articles put in and Mr. Fraser duetto the clergy andothers who took deep interest but he was forced to do so by the action of the made against them-made boue fide, and in no public object whatever. He would also put Smith's motive. they-thought the defendant it that if the jury thought some slight object
in the case, and the previous decision was upheld. leamed counsel, who wanted to prove malice, good faith. He could have easily proved his was actuated by malice and not boda fide, then He would argue shortly that he, in the same sease 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-Smithvilege 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 then. 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 be believed to be the would ask the jury to draw that conclusion, be- case depended entirely on the co-existence in the gnding himself to his clients--the public of Hong- censured also. He thought when they heard the correct version of that cast was that a rehearsal cause if Mr. Fraser-Smith's object was to give a mind of the writer of a bona 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 but if malicious, whatever privilege defendant a vindictive spirit, and was bad in law, had in malice kasto be inferred from those criticisms. Mr. Bandmann lifted up his hand and struck Mrs. 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. Eraser-Smith read portion of article of 7th Rousby to knock a book out of her hand. There off in our yesterday's issue, Mr. Francis went on against Herr Bandmann. Ile 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. Landmann). That was the were several witnesses to pave that Mrs. Rousby to say that the defendant opened out a defamatory in every possible way to ridicule and con- Smith was not content to plead not guilty, but which he had referred to, the Bishop had gone criticism of Herr Handmann's "Hamlet" which was knocked down and hut, but the case was libel circulating in the Colony and gave it pub-tempt, and exceeded privilege in every pos- sald 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. Rousty had shown her licity, not only that, but at intervals since referred sible way. Mr. Francis read a portion of ments was true. If he failed to prove every one, defence, but his communications had been held fair and impartial, and in other words his (defen- arm covered with bruises, which she alleged in different policies and critiques to that article, the article, and said the jury would see that the verdict must go against him. 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- reviving it in the mind of readers. One word in the defendant repeated and emphasized the failed in his proof of any pica he was lost and out. A case was heard some time ago, Nel- In these critiques, however, he had simply dealt mann called her servant in prove that many of reference to Mr. Blandmann in that matter. Mr. charges and added every epithet of contempt must be found guilty on the charges. He must son versus Pitman, in which Mr. Francis with Mr. Bandmain in the same way as in the the bruises were caused by a fall downstairs Fraser-Smith 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 prosecution claimed when that lady went home somewhat the worse the public stage as Herr Bandmann. 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 malice; he had both praised and cen- for drink, Mr. Bandmann 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 shewn,. There was one privi- 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. Handmann, 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. Bardmann was as thoroughly at liberty lo had disagreed with him. He was so oinniscient had not. After they had published libellous that what Mr. Pitman wrote, was in self defence, Hamlet and Sbylock Mr. Smith then read the of the case which, had he been in London,
TELEGRAMS.
SINGAPORE, 19th July, 11.30 2.111. The French and Italian fleets have refused to assist Adinital Seymour to maintain order. A strong force under the command of Arali Bey is, at Kafredour. The Egyptian troops are denota-
lizcel
LOCAL AND GENERAL.
A CORRESPONDENT asked us the other day what was the fastest time ever made by a stemmer between Hongkong and San Francisco. The City of Peking seamed from Hongkong to Yokohamn in 4 days, 19 hours, and from Yokohama to San Francisco in 16 days 19 hours and 8 uinutes. The fastest run from Yokohama to San Francisco was made by the Oczanie, her time being 14 days 9 hours. The City of Peking's fastest time is ng days 15 hours.
A CORRESPONDENT writes :-"Revolutionary kleas are going forward." "The Mazaruse, a weekly newspaper of the neighbouring colony, proclaims that the best system of government four Macao is, as it thinks, that which is based on the Com mune, and considers as the greatest source of its evils and the cause of its decay, the system adopted by the Portuguese Government of send- ing, from the metropolis the leading officials, in- cluding the Governor. According to the Maca. ense, Macap would thrive astonishingly were the Municipal Chamber charged to manage the finances of the colony, and to direct all its home affairs, as well as the relations with the Chinese authorities. It is assumed that the Members of the Senate, instead of being led astray by local and relatiopal influences, would be a corporation composed of men having permanent interests in the city, and their own families to advise and lead them in any great crisis. It does not suit them to have a Governor, nor other functionaries conie over from Portugal. Should these ideas succeed in going further than the columns of the Macoeuse, we shall have in a short time near us a new Republic of Andorra under the protection of the government... that is, of the mandarins
of Canton."
SUPREME COURT.-CRIMINAL
SESSIONS.
-
THE "TELEGRAPH " LineL CASE,
|
|
|
fessional men, especially peripatetic actors of the Bandmann type.
His Lordship pointed out that it was some- thing more than the extracts, it was the remarks of which complaint was made.