The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-06-29 00:00:00

WIFE BEATING.

A cooper, named Hugh O'Donnell, was brought up on a
chafge of having violently assaulted his wife. The prisoner
lives in Thomas-street, and it appeared that he was in the
habit of getting drunk, and whilst in that state he used to
ill-treat his wife. A day or two since he was drunk, and beat
the woman, and flung her down stairs, breaking her leg. She
is as present in hospital. The prisoner was remanded. •
THE

Mr. Raffles requested the reporters to acknowledge the
receipt of £5 for the poor-box from a gentleman who did not
wish his name to be published.

(Before Messrs. TYREE and EfougnToN.)
cAurroN TO SITU _3 ASTERS.

Mr. Cox, one of the pier masters, summoned Captain Chud-
leigh, master of a vessel called the Louisteen, for having violated
the 60th section of the Mersey Docks Consolidation Act, the
penalty for which is £2O. The section provides that any master
of a ship forcing his vessel into the dock contrary to the direc-
tions of the pier master, and so as to endanger his own or other
ships, becomes liable to the penalty of £2O but the magistrates
possess the power of mitigation. It appeared that on the 20th
instant, the defendant forced his vessel into the Sandon Dock,
whilst another and a larger vessel was being taken into the
dock. He ran great risk of having his own vessel injured, as
well as damaging the Otter. The magistrates Said it was a
serious case, and they were doubtful if they should not inflict
the full penalty. They hoped.thiS Case would be a warning to
masters of vessels in' future and therefore they would fine'hiut
only £2 Ns and costs.

1., l'
GREAT SUCCESS OF A NEW PERIODTCAL .--...N0t .I.lg 0 t
the periodical character that has come out to
our time
can pretend to a success equal to that which atteuled
the new work which appeared last Saturday, entitled
~ The Volunteer Review." Its first issued reached close
upon 30,000.—Panch.

Mr. EVANS thought that if the facts stated by the
solicitor had come before the jury, he did not see how
they could come to such a decision.

Mr. BOULT said that this was just another example
of the practice which seemed now to prevail in courts of
law, by turning the scale against public bodies such as
the Dock Boar& and in favour of private individuals.

There appeared to be every facility now given to private
individuals for plundering the public, and that too

. .
unduly and unfairly. Why, this was exactly the
reverse of what should be the case. They (the board)
were delegated by the body of the ratepayers to look

after their interests; but there were parties Fho, to

gain a certain advantage, would ettcrifice the interests

of the trust, which ought to be supported and encouraged,
and if any partiality was shown it should be in their

'avotir." He thought that they ought to prOtest against

the decision.

The CHAIRMAN---I am afraid we cannot alter the
decision of the jury.
Mr. Evarts—We must alter it by bringing public
opinion to bear upon it.
The minutes were then confirmed.
WAREHOUSE COMMITTEE.
The minutes of this committee embraced no point of
public interest. On the motion of Mr. Arnold they
were confirmed.