Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-07-28 00:00:00

NEW ZEALAND.

The mails f:-.-nn Nnw Zealand, besides bringing news of
the William Denny's stranding, and of the schemes for
saving her, have brought the more ple•ising intelligence
that what seems likely to prove an available gold-field
has been disc iverel near Nelson. As yet the accounts of its
yield have been so couflicting, that it is impossible to say
whether it will pay fur working, but the chances seem to
be, that without yielding so large a propirtion of prizes as
have been gathered on the diggings of New South Wales
and Victoria, it will be one of those fi :ids for employment
wherein industrious, steady. and persevering men may.
make fair wages. Tne intelligence as yet received is not
such as to create any anticipation that a large digging
population will be attracted from thews colonies to the
Nelson gold-fields. It would be folly, under present cir-
cumstances, to rash there. A very little longer will show
what is its real value, and what are the chances of sty:loess
it holds out.

SYDNEY GOLD CzneimArt.—Tho several escorts have.
delivered daring- the present year 53,588 ounces of gold
dust; during the same months of 1856 37,080 ounces,
which is an increase of about 47 per cent. in favour of
the present year. We quote Meroo £3 15s 5d per oz.,
Adelong .83 14s 6.1 per oz , Tambaroora £3 14s 61 per oz.,
Stouey Creek £3 13s 6d per oz., Sofala and Turon £3
13s per oz., Braidwood £3 12s 6d per oz., Hanging Bock
£3 12s 6d per oz., Rc:ckey River (clean) £3 12s 6d per cz.,
Oiueo £3 58 6d per oz. English sovereigns a per cent.
premium, American coins at a premium,. Chilian ditto at
a discount, French gold and silver ditto ditto.
SYDNEY LABWR MARKET.—The weather still impedes
the usuJl amount of business being transacted in our
labour market ; this, in addition to the particular period
of the season, enables us to report but few engagements
f,r servants and country Ill:wirers, c omparatively splaking.
The hiring has been on rather easier terms for the em-
ployers, for most descriptions of agricultural and labouring
memo; mechanics are also vary plentiful ; female domestic
servants are more ablndant excepting good family cooks,
which are still scarce and erg:aired for. Plasterers have
reduced their wages 2s. per city, 13s. being now the
current rate. Good descriptions of farming men can
now be found daily on hire from the 14te emigzaut arrivals..

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.- DURHAM, JULY 24.

BEFORE BARON WATSON.

RAYS v. Bacscoa.—This was sit action of trim COll to
which the defendant pleaded "Not guilty." Mr. Picker-
in?, Q.O , and Mr. Hea'h appeared for the plaintiff ' •
Mr. Price and Mr. Davison for the defendant. Mr.
Pickering, in stating the case, said the action was
brought to recover compensation, such as the law awarded,
for one of the greatest injuries that one man could inflict
upon another. 'ibe James Hays, was a master
mariner in South hields, and the defendant. John Briscoe,
had formerly been in some trade ; but, in consequence of
his having received a considerable fortune from his grand-
father, he was now out of business, and lived on his own
means. The plaintiff was married to a person in his
own station of life in 1851, and for several years
lived on the most affectionate terms with her.
They had one daughter, who at the period of
the injury complained of was about five years
of age. The plaintiff and his wife lived first at New-
castle, and afterwards removed to South Shields. The
plaintiff's occupation of a master mariner compelled him
to be occasionally absent, and in October, 1855, he was
engaged to take a vessel to Constantinople and Balsklava.
As some occupation for his wife, and to enable her to
maintain herself more comfortably, he took a shop for her
to carry on a grocery business, and he also secured to her,
by a seaman's allotment note, the payment of half his
wages from his employers during the time he should be
absent. In addition to this, he had made arrargements
with a relative to pay her an allowance in money. To show
the affectionate terms on which the plaintiff and his wife
at this time were living, the learned counsel read the fol-
lowing correspondence bstween the plaintiff and his wife
while he was in London with his ship, just before sailing
/or Balaklava:—

South Shields, Oct. 30, 18.55.
My dear Husband,—l embrace the present oppor'unity of
answering your most welcome letter, and I am happy to know
that you have got safe to London ; and my dear James, I do
wish I had been with you. But write all particulars about
the ship, and where you will he going to; and if you think I
might shut the shop up for a week and come to you. . . .
My dear child is quite well and myself; but, my dear, I have
keen very unhappy since you Left me.—l remain ever your
affectionate wife, MAUGARITE HAYS.
To this letter the plaintiff replied in an affectionate letter,
stating his safe arrival in London, and giving an account
of his ship. On the 9th of November, the plaintiff's wife
wrote again to him about his clothes, and concluding,
My dear Hush ind,—l conclude wi,h my deepest love to
you, and remain ever your affectionate wife,
MARGARITE HAYS.
Oa the same day the plaintiff wrote to his wife, and,
after giving her some instructions about forwarding
periodicals and newspapers to him while away, his letter
proceeds :
I send my best respects to all friends, and give my dear
little Janey a kiss fur me. I dare say she often talks about
her dada, for I think she must miss me much, as well as her
poor mamma. And now, my dear wife, what am I to say
about your coming to London? You well know how gladly,
how readily, I would wish you with me, for I am sure I enjoy
no real pleasure nor happiness but only in your dearcompaoy.
My feelings plead hard for you ; but what to do in this matter
I really do not know. Cur welfare and future happiness
depend upon our economy. We wish to be careful, although
the wish is at variance with our fond and deep feelings for
each other. I cannot say no to your very natural request to
come to me, nor dare I say yes when I consider how we are
circumstanced. Come, if you cannot be reconciled without
coming, but stop at home if you have strength of mind to do
so. If you come here, there will be the pain of parting from
each other again repeated, and I can assure you the excited
state of my mind has with me hardly worn off since I bade you
farewell at home. The eyes of our friends are alto upon ns,
and, although they cannot f.,,e1 our separation as we do our-
selves, they might think your coming to London in the present
state of our circumstances a wasteful and unnecessary expen-
diture. Yet, still I say, come, if you cannot be happy without
coming, and I shall be glad, very glad indeed, to receive you;
only advise me first of your determination.—l remain, my
dear and beloved wife, your affectionate and loving husband,
JAMES HAYS.
In another letter, dated the 10th of November, addressed
by the plaintiff to his wife, he " wishes the ship was far
enough rather than it should be the cause of thus separat-
ing us." He says, "I would fain have you here, if it
could only be managed cleverly, for I feel a great miss of
you. If you come, coma quickly." In a letter dated the
19th of November the plaintiff wrote to his wife :
Yours of yesterday I have received, and I am grieved to
learn that you have heen ill. I thought that something more
than common would prevent my fond and faithful wife from
writing to me for four days. Thank God, you say you are
again well, also my dear child lf this enterprise meets
with the Divine blessing, it may be the means of enabling me
to provide for the comfort and able maintenance of a beloved
wife and my dear, dear child ; it may enable me to get estab-
lished on shore, never more, my dear Margarite, to part with
you again.

On the 21st of November the plaintiff s wife wrote to
him:—

I received your most welcome letter this morning, and I am
happy to bear that you are in good health, as it leaves me and
my dear little Janey at present My dear
bueband, I think I have got ro more to tell you at present ;
but I must conclude, with deep affection to you, my dear, and
believe me to be your loving wife "
"' Oa the 3rl of peeernbsr, 1855, the plaintiff wrote again
to his wife from London :

My dear and loving Wife,—l have just received your most
affectionate letters, and Ido feel blessed in the pos-
session and the fond and deep affection of my own dear wife,
my ever loving and loved par' ner through life. A.lay God in
His mercy protect you and my dear, dear child in my unavoid-
able absence, and bring me once mare in safety to my own
haven of happiness—my own happy home ; for it is there and
there only I feel myself truly blest. My Margarito, my wife,
mine, mine only, I have won thee, and I will love thee and
bless thee for ever.

The letter went on to state he would send her a supply
of stationery for her shop, and anticipated his happiness
on meeting her on his return. In answer to this letter wee
one from his wife, dated Shields, the 9th of December, in
which she says the shop improves week y, and she hopes
it will be all ready for him when he comes back again,
" and then, my dear, I hope you will not have to go away
any more from me ; for this has almost killed me parting
from you " Several other letters of a sunder tenour were
read, in one of which, written by the plaintiff from the
Downs, he tells her to go to his owners to receive the ba-
lance of wages due to him, which he had ordered to be paid
to her, and also to take care of a policy of insurance on his
effects for .le-)0 which he had sent to her in case of any-
thing happening to him. Some letters of the same tenour
were also read, dated Balakiava, one of which informed
her of the time when he expected to be back home. In
October, 1836, the plaintiff arrived at Leith on his return,
and immediately wrote to his wife to announce the ship's
arrival, and to tell her that he had bought her a Royal
Stuart tartan dress and plaid, and had sent it to her.
During the interval that the plaintiff was away that
injury had been inflicted upon him, which was the
subject of the present action The defendant was a
married man at that time, but now was a widower,
and had children and grandchildren. He had been
acquainted with the plaintiff before he went away,
and was in the habit of visiting his wife after the
plaintiff left. She had charged her shop for another in the
same street in Aril, and it was at this latter shop that
the improper intimacy had taken place. The defendant
was seen constantly in the shop acting as if he were the
owner, and she was seen constantly on his knee caressed
by him. On one occasion he had slept in the house under
circumstances which left no doubt as to the terms on which
they were living. On another occasion the bed had been
noticed in a tumbled state, as if two persons had slept
upon it. It was mentioned in the defendant's presence
and he made no reply. This state of things having
gone on for several month?, the letter written by
the plaintiff stating when he should return,
was sh ivrn by the plaintiff's wife to one of
the witnesses, and was also shown by her, as
-would be proved, to the defendent. In September, 1856,
the defendant took lodgings for the plaintiff's wife to go
to, so that she might not be at home on his return, the
shop was shut up, and she loft Senth Shields with her
child, and went to live at Sedgefield at the lodghies which
the defendant had obteieed for her. There she took
the name of Mrs. Briscoe, and there she remained
till December, the defendant visiting her every week
on terms of the closest intimacy. In December she
left Sedgefield and si ent to Newcastle with the
defendant, where she remained six weeks, and on the 7th
of February the defendant and plaintiff's wife were marr:ed
at Bishop Wearmouth, and after that lived as man and wife
at the lodgings at Sedgefield ; and on the 9th of March
fellowir g she gave birth to an infant, the result of the
intercourse between her and the defendant. He could
only suggest that the plaintiff's wife bad committed the
offence of bigamy in order to avoid discovery and com-
ments on her connexion with the defendant. On
the plaintiff's arrival at Leith he received a letter '
from his wife, stating that she had given up the shop,
and had gone to live in a situation where she could
keep herself and child. On arriving at South Shields the
plaintiff could learn nothing of his wife, nor where she had
gone. In October he chanced to meet the defendant at
the Bath Hotel, South Shields, and asked him if he knew
where his wife was, but the defendant said he did not—he
only wished he did. It was not until May last that the
plaintiff received some information that his wife was living

at Sedgefield, where he went in company with a policeman
in search of her- There he found the defendant and his
w fe living together as man and wife, and on his asking her
how she came to be living there, she told him that she was
married to the defendant, and burst into tears. The
plaintiff then immediately gave her into custody on the
charge of bigamy. The defendant, it was evident, had
used his wealth for the purpose of seducing her from her
duty to her husband. On one occasion it would ba proved
that he had thrown to her carelessly a £lOO note. He had
found her poor and lonely, her husband bbsent. He had
wealth at command, and had taken advantage of her
position to insinuate himself into her affection to destroy
the happiness of her husband and the home of her
child Under these circumstance,•, it was for the jury
to say what damages they would give. Proof of the
marriage was then given, when a short consultation
having taken place between the learned counsel, Mr.
Price, on b&ialf of his client, consented to a verdict
for £l5O. Mr. Pickering: Your lordship and the jury
will understand that the acceptance by the plaintiff of this
verdict is quite bona fide and without collusion. There
are many painful circumstances which would be disclosed
if the evidence were gone into—painful as wog to the
witnesses as to the parties. His lordship: There can be
no doubt about the bona fides of the plaintiff He has
brought this action, and has indicted the woman for bigamy.
This is a very painful case—extremely so. I have attended
to Mr Pickering's opening, which showed a very strong
affection between the plaintiff and his wife, How this
lady came t) change her views so very suddenly I don't
know. A. verdict was then taken for the plaintiff—
damageY, £l5O. The plaintiff's wife, Margarite Hays, a
very nand,ome and respectably dressed young woman,
with an infant in her arms, was yesterday tried and found
guilty of bigamy in marrying the defendant, as stated.
His lordship this morning sentenced her to one months.'
imprisonment. --
WESTERN ClRCUlT.—Extersa SAT TRD AY.

TRIAL AND ACQUITTAL OP A NAVAL OFFICER AT PLY-
mourn.—Thomas Warre Simean, aged 22, mate of her
Majesty's ship Cordoba, surrendered to take his trial on a
charge of having uttered a certain forged instrument,
called " an officer's full pay bill," knowing the same to
be forged, at Plymouth, en the 13th of May last. The
prisoner pleaded not guilty. Mr. Serjea,nt Kioglake and
Mr. Poulden prosecuted ; and Mr. Collier, Q C., and Mr.
Coleridge defended the prisoner. Tiae case excited much
interest among the officers of the Roy al Navy at Ply-
mouth, the prisoner being a great favourite among them,
and his father also holding the distinguished position
of an admiral in the Rr.yal Navy. From the evidence
produced for the prosecution, it would appear that on
the afternoon of Thursday, the 13th of May,
a naval officer, in mate's uniform, went into
the bank of Messrs. Hodges at Devonport, with a navy pay
bill for £BO 10g., which the manager of the bank (Mr.
Richard Coombs) cashed at the request of the person who
presented it, less 4s. 6d. discount, and the latter picked
up the money hurriedly, and left the bank, where he did
not remain three minutes. The time fixed for this trans-
action by the banking clerks, Mr. Coombs (the manager),
Mr. Ross (the clerk), and Mr. Luscomb (the messenger of
the bank), was between a quarter to and four o'clock, at
which latter period the bank closed. These three wit-
nesses also spoke confidentially as to the prisoner being
the officer who presented the bill in question. On the
evidence of Mr. Henry Warren Strutt, a clerk in the full
and half pay department of the Admiralty, it was proved
that the pay sheet in question purported to be an
officer's full pay bill, drawn by Paymaster Jeffreys, of
the Vixen, and countersigned by Commander McChown
and the master, Edward C. Ball, being for three months'
pay drawn in advance. These officers and the crew had
been turned over from the Vixen. In reply to Mr. Collier,
Mr. Struts said these printed forms should not be easily
obtainable, and ought to be in the careful custody of the
officer of each ship, as these blank forms which were
government property ought not to be bought, though,
witness believed, that a great many of them were sold by
mistake from the waste paper office. Mr. Collier : The
waste paper and red tape office, I presume. (Laughter.)
Witness (in continuation) said there had been four or five
other forgeries brought to his knowlbdge at London, Wool-
wich, and other places, but the forgery in question was a
very clumsy one, as in neither instance were the proper
signatures of the officers given, indeed he could scarcely
dignify it with the name of a forgery. The proper name
of the paymaster was George Jeffreys ; the forgery was
John Jeffery. The name of the master was Edward
C. Ball, which was changed in the forged bill into John
Ball ; and G. T. Meechum (the commander) should have
been G. F. Mecham. The proper names of each of these
officers were given in the Navy List, and therefore this
forgery indicated great ignorance of naval business.
Lieutenant Edward Leward, of the Leopard. proved that
the signature to the bill, purportng to be that of Captain
Mecham, was not his handwriting. Master Ball proved
that the signature of Master Ball, of the Vixen, was not
his son's handwriting, and the paymaster of the Pylades
proved that the signature attaahed to the forged bill was
not that of his brother George, paymaster of the Vixen.
This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr. Collier
addressed the jury in an impressive manner for the pri-
soner, cot tending that the banking clerks, though
they all three swore to the prisoner as the man who pre-
sented
the forged bill, must be mistaken, as he should
conclusively prove that the prisoner was in another part
of the town, with two young brother officers, at the
time spoken to, viz , between a quarter to four and four
o'clock on the day in question. With this view the learned
counsel called Mr. Hannibal Hawkins M'Arthur, Mr.
Morris, and Mr. Morgan, clerks in the pay-office at
Plymouth dockyard ; Richard Wawm. a dockyard police-
man ; Mr. Alexander Thistlethwaite Collier, midshipman
of the Cordelia, Mr. Henry Wogan, mate of the Cordelia.
Mr. Charles Cordell, midshipman of the Cordelia, and
several other witnesses were called, who accounted satis-
factorily for the prisoner's disposal of his time from half-
past three to a quarter-past four on the day in question,
during the whole of which time he was in the company
of either one or all of these parties, and if so, he could not
have been the party who cashed the forged pay-bill at the
bank. In the face of this testimony, Mr. Sergeant King
lake abandoned the prosecution, and the prisoner was
acquitted, to the great joy of his naval comrades, who
crowded round him to offer their congratulations.