biglam/hmd_newspapers huggingface dataset:
The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-08-14

SUCCESSFUL TRIP from ENGLAND to
AMERICA in a SMALL YACHT.

The Boston Journal of July 21st says :—The
voyage across the Atlantic from east to west has
just been made by what is believed to be the smallest
craft which has ever attempted or accomplished the
journey. Several miniature vessels have crossed
from this side, but the return trip, it is thought,
has never been made. The yacht in question, the
Effort, 159 tons burden, of Greenock, Scotland,
arrived at St. John, N. 8., on Saturday, having
left Fleetwood, England, on May 29. Westerly
winds, with heavy weather, prevailed until June
5 on which date at midnight a heavy gale sprung
up from the south, with heavy weather and rain.
Then the wind hauled round to W. by N. and a heavy,
cross sea had to be contended with. Through all the
little craft did nobly, and did not ship a sea. Other
gales were experienced at different times during the
39 days the voyage lasted, and Capt. Hugh Hesketh,
the commander, says he never experienced such rough
weather before. The Effort is 53 feet in length, 10 feet
wide, 6i feet deep, and is fitted with two engines of six
horses' power, working on the screw shaft diagonally
from either side. She is schooner rigged with a square
foresail, but was originally a sloop, and has one deck.
She was constructed by Edward Kerr. in 1868, and is
consequently seven years old. The cabin and engine
room extend nearly the whole length of the vessel.
The outside planking is of pitch pine, and the
timbers of oak. She came out under sail, her screw
being unshipped, There was no chronometer on
board, her position being determined by lunar obser-
vations, a thing seldom done. She was steered ly a
tiller, and was very easily managed. In stormy
weather her behaviour was better than in an ordinary
chop, as in the latter she jumped about considerably.
The wind was unfavourable during almost the entire
voyage, and the highest rate of speed attained was six
knots an hour. The crew consisted of Hugh Hes-
keth, captain; John Lightbody, mate; Thomas Hes-
keth, 14 years old; Wm. Hesketh, 12 years old: one
cat, name not given.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-08-14

Ai" , i
,-,,
i ,
.
iiimini......__

UNSEAWORTHY SHIPS.

Sir. C. Adderley, in answer to questions 'by Mr. 11. I.
Reed, for Mr. Plimsoll, said that the effect of the Merchant
Shipping Act of 1873 was that many ships about to sail from
Ireland had been stopped by the Board of Trade as unsea-
worthy, and some offences under the Act of 1971 had been
prevented. With respect to deck cargoes, lie could only hope
that other countries would take m,asures on the subject
similar to those recently taken by Parliament.
Mr. Cross. in reply to the same hon. ertleman, said the
Home Office were in communication with the Board of Trade
as to the form of issue of another circular to magistrates of
seaplrt towns, reminding them that they had power to order
a survey of ships when seamen were brought before them
charged with refusing to -go to sea.
Sir C. Adderley, in reply to Mr. 11. B. Sheridan, said the
Board of Trade had no power to initiate any system of com-
munication between guard and passengers. A great many
of the companies had not had their system approved by
the Board of Trade, and the reason that the Board of Trade
had taken no proceedings was that the subject was under
the consideration of a Commissioner.

coLonzr, BAKER'S
." IMPRISONMENT."
In answer to Mr. E. Jenkins and Mr. Mundella, with ret-
peel to Colonel Baker's treatment in prison,
Mr. Cros3 stated that by the 28 and 29 Viet., chap. 123,
section 6 and 7, in every prison to which the Act
applied, prisoners convicted of misdemeanor, and not
sentenced to hard labour, should be divided into two
divisions, one of which should be called the first divi-
sion, and whenever any prisoner was convicted without
hard labour it should be competent to the judge to order
that the prisoner should be sent to prison as a first-
class misdemeanant. When the learned judge sentenced
Colonel Baker he made out the warrant for his commitment,
in which it was stated that he should be a first-class misde-
meanant, and therefore he would come under the first divi-
sion, and under the ordinary prison rules, the effect of which
was to place him in the category of prisoners entitled to the
privileges mentioned in the question. This was a question of
law, and one which involved action neither on the part of
the Home Office nor the visiting justices.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-08-14

CRADLEY.

ASSAULT CASE.-At the Petty Sessions held yesterday.
at Stourbridge, before Colonel Fletcher and Colonel
Barrows, Joseph Robinson and Benjamin Parsons were
charged with violently assaulting Hannah Parsons, on the
9th inst. Mr. Perry defended. Complainant said she
was talking to Parson's wife about chiidren, whet} Robin-
son came up, and without a word struck her a violent
blow on the lip, and cut it in two. She had to go to a
doctor to have it sewn up. Parsons came up, and struck
her with a piece of iron on the head, and cut it open.
She did not strike them again. Myra Walton and Maria
Parsons gave corroborative evidence. Mr. Perry, for the
defence, denied that the assault was committed by either
of the defendants, and called Ann Penrice, John Robin-
son and Mary Ann Robinson, whose evidence went to
show that it was not the defendants who committed the
assault. The Bench fined Robinson lOs and costs, and
dismissed the summons against Parsons.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-08-14

HABITUAL DRUNKARDS.

During the sitting of the British Medical Associa-
tion in Edinburgh, a discussion arose on the control
of insane drunkards, on which a paper was read by
Dr. Peddie, Edinburgh, the conclusion of which was
that, as the State regarded the suicide either as a cri-
minal or as insane, the dipsomaniac having also lost
his reason in governing his will, must therefore be
regarded as under a mental malady, and treated as
such.
Dr. G. F. Boddington read a paper "On the con-
trol and restraint of habitual drunkards." He con-
sidered that the general opinion among medical men
was that a remedy was .requisite for this crying evil,
which medical men could not only fully appreciate,
but which they were powerless to remove. Could the
pubfic fully recognise the degradation and misery re-
sulting from drunkenness, indignation would at once
mount up, and medical men would be saved any
further trouble by the country insisting on remedial
measures.
Professor Christison said that therewas no doubt
a well-considered resolution on the subject treated of
in the last two papers, put forth under the auspices
of the association ought to have great weight with
the Government. They must therefore be careful
what they said. He proposed a resolution, which
, was as follows :—"That excessive intemperance ism
many cases a symptom of a special form of insanity
which requires special treatment, with a view,—first,
to the recovery of those affected, and secondly, to
the protection and advantage of them and of society;
that in the present state of the law such treatment
is not attainable; and that it is desirable that legal
provision be made to render it attainable."
Dr. Husband, of York, seconded the motion.
Br. Morris. Baltimore, stated that, though he lived
in a country where personal liberty was greatly prized,
yet there was a law in some parts by which they could
confine confirmed drunkards.
Dr. Playfair said that he had been on the Committee
on Habitual Drunkards, and although at first of opinion
that education alone could prevent drunkenness, the
evidence adduced before the committee led him to sign
the report recommending restraint for habitual
drunkards.
The motion was then put to the meeting and carried
unanimously.