The Sun.
London, England, 1863-04-08 00:00:00

PIRACY IN THE PACIFIC OCEAN.

Accounts have bees received
in Paris from Tahiti
de-
tails of a successful cruise last. They contain the
French cutter Latonche-Trofevt.hlle commander
es, to put an end to a
new description of piracy which
being practised
in those seas. The Latouele-TaB revlle captured a
on
brig under Peruvian coloursn the
-waters of the island Makemo. The Dec.berg 3,
to Papeeti, under the command of a
midshipman,wfr ant
brig, which had remained 10 or 12 days
at the
island of Fakarava, carried away 28 of the native
When she was captured she had on board 151'
In-
dians belonging to the islands of Motutonga, Tauea
Kati, Kaneki, and Fakarava, which are under the
French protectorate. The captain of the captured
brig declared her name to be the Mercedes de Who-
lieig. Her papers were not regular, and the soi-
disant captain figures among the names of the crew
as pilot. The brig's cutter, which was fitted up for
the conveyance of natives from the islands to the
brig, had escaped, but the Indians were actively
searching for her, having been apprised by the
French officer of the dan g er which they had escaped.
Of the 151 natives found on board the Mercedes 91
were landed on the island of Faaite, delighted to be
restored to their homes. They requested the com-
,mander of the Latonche-Treville to express their
gvatitude to the Imperial Commissioner for the ser-
v ;co he had rendered them. The 60 others were
broight to Papeeti in order that they might give
the ,lecessary information for the prosecution of the
crew of the Mercedes. Prince Ariiane, who followed
the exp edition, showed the greatest alacrity in being
oneof the Orit in boarding the brig. It is expected
that the investigation which has been commenced
into the schemes of the commander of the Mercedes
will bring to light some extraordinary facts. The
captain of the Latonche-Treville had resumed his
cruise to the island of Tuamotu-Gambier and the
Marquesas.

Court-Martial on Capt. H, S, Hillyar, C. 8.,
and Lieut. Lillingston.

PORTSMOUTH, Tuesday.

The court-martial en the above-named offic,q.s, who were
charged with cruelty to a boy on board the Cadmus, was
resumed this morning on board the Victory.
The boy Baker was recalled. He said—l was in prison
at Barbadoes accused of desertion. I was eight months on
board the ship and had no leave. I have never broken my
leave half an hour since I have been in the service. The
ship's company had 24 hours leave at Antigua. The mas-
ter at arms (Arnold) stopped my leave because I owed him
2s. I never broke out of the ship and went on shore. I
never disguised myself, neither tried to leave the island. I
was taken by the police, who asked if I belonged to the Cad-
mus. I said " Yes.'' I was taken to the station-house, and
from thence to my ship. On the following Sunday I was
taken before Captain Hillyar, whe sentenced me to 28 days,
military prison. I was two days absent from the ship OR
that occasion. I have no proof that the master at arms
stopped my pay because I owed him 2s.

Cross-examined by Captain Hillyar-1 was refused
washing for eight days at New Brunswick. I applied to
Master-at-Arms Arnold for permission to wash. I was
afraid to complain of not being allowed to wash. I had
bread bags on when I attempts d to get away from the ship.
After my attempt to get away from the ship I had no other
clothes but what is accustomed to be had in the navy. I
did not complain to any one about not getting leave because
I thought I should be stopped for owing the master at arms
2s. I had clothes, hut not money. I had my bed to sleep
on when I was in irons. I did not state yesterday that
had no hammock. I said I had to sleep on the deck; I
could not sleep in my hammock. The ship was in the dock
at Newßrun.owick when I was charged with attempting to
escape. I can only recollect the boy Melkhams trying to
escape. I heard that men had endeavoured to escape, but
I did not know it. I was punished for making away with
my clothes. I have said that Bowles bore malice towards
me because I would not give him my grog. I do not know
that it might have been because I brought the false accu•
sation against him. I believe the investigation relative to
the conspiracy against Bowles was held at St. Thomas, I
believe in Captain Hillyar's cabin. The (lacers present at
that inquiry w,re the captain, first lieutenant, second lieu-
tenant, and other officers. I believe the evidence given at
the inquiry was taken down in writing. (Witness enume-
rated those who were charged with him for conspiring
against Bowles). When the ship was mustered at Halifax
by the admiral, I wore an old blue jumper and trousers.
You stopped and pointed me out to the admiral as one of
the incorrigibles whom you applied to have discharged from
the service. When the crew were told that if they had any
complaints to make to go aft before the admiral, I did not
go and prefer any complaint whatever. I knew that Capt.
Hillyar was to leave the ship that day, but I did not know
it was my duty to complain and ask for my discharge, or
for anything.
Did you ever complain to me of being ill-used ?—No.
Why did you not complain to the admiral with one or
two other men, who went aft to make known their griev-
ances ?—I did not know that any one did go aft.

By Lieut. Lillingston—l cannot tell when the treatment
of my being stripped took place. It was in 1862, before and
after Capt. Hillyar left the ship. I was stripped in the steer-
age by the master at arms by order of Lieut. Lillingston,
who also ordered me to be put in bread-bags. I never heard
the master at arms make any complaint against me at that
time. I am certain that this took place in the first dog watch
of the day we left Halifax for New Brunswick. The order
was given on the quarter-deck. I did not make any com-
plaint of the treatment I received. I only asked the master
at arms to allow me to wash myself. That was the fourth
day after we arrived at New Brunswick. When you ordered
me to be scrubbed with sand and canvas I was in the port
gangway. Bowles was present then, but I did not see the
master at arms. You ordered me to be taken forward to
have my hair cut, and to be scrubbed with sand and canvas.
My clothes were to be washed. I had a flannel and check
shirt on then. I had no trousers on. I was brought to the
quarter deck with bread-bags on. I had on the flannel shirt
in addition to the bags. A hole was cut in the bottom of
the bag for my head, and one on each side for my arms. I
believe I had another bread-bag drawn over my legs, but I
am not certain. I did my duty in that costume half the
way from Halifax to St. John's, on the lower deck. I was
punished for being asleep on the look-out at night during
that voyage, and also for skulking; but I was not asleep.
I continued doing duty on the lower deck until the day I
left the ship at Newfoundland.

How, then, did it happen that you were punished for
being asleep on the look-out ?—lt was previous to that,
before I was put in bread-bags; that was the punish-
ment and black-list. I passed the officer of the watch in
a jumper and trousers of blue serge, and was in those
clothes when I was accused of being asleep. Those clothes
were not taken from me, but I was not allowed to wear
them. When I was put in the bread-bag suit I was not
permitted to wear my serge clothes. My head, flesh, and
clothes were lousy on the 30th July, when I was brought
before you. I allowed that I had only worn the clothes
that I was brought before you in since the punishment
awarded me
,for being asleep on the look-out. Besides
Bowles thrashing me, the master at arms has caned me,
and the sergeant• major rope's-ended me at Santa Martha.
I cannot say that you had any knowledge of me being
thrashed. I was brought before Capt. Hillyar at Antigua,
bat not at New Brunswick. When at the latter place I
was about three days in irons before I was brought be-
fore Captain Hillyar. When I was flogged across the gun
by the sergeant-major, who was on duty as master-at-
arms, I never made any complaint to you of having been
ill-treated by Bowles or any one else. You (Lieutenant
Lillingaton) were present when I was rope's-ended by the
sergeant-major at Santa Martha.
By Captain Hillyar—Did I not send for you on the
quarter deck and tell you that I should request the admiral
to dismiss you from the service as a bad and incorrigible
character as soon as you were out of debt to the Crown ? I
owed the master-at-arms 2s for sardines.

By the Court—l did not hear the order given at Halifax
for any one who had any complaint to make to do so to
Admiral Milne at muster. The rope used was about an
inch rope, with which I was punished across the gun at
Santa Martha. It was a piece of rope he carried about with
him.

By Captain Phillimore—When you were scrubbed with
sand and canvas was any part of the akin raised or removed
from your body ?
Witness—l was very sore, but Ido not knew whether
there was any skin raised or not.
Were you sore from the scrubbing ?—I was not sore be-
fore I was scrubbed. I was beaten after I was scrubbed.

Was there any mark of blood from the scrubbing ?—I
did not notice any; there was from the beating.
On what part of your body ?—My head.

By Lieut. Lillingston—Did you make any complaint to
any one while you were being scrubbed by the boy Haynes,
as you state you were hurt, and, if so, to whom ?,

Witness—No.

Was the order which yon say I gave for you being put
into bread-bags on the voyage from Halifax to Newfound-
land, as a punishment, given in the presence of any one else,
and if so, whom P—The master at arms.

The Master at Arms (George W. Wannell) of her Ma-
jesty's ship Cadmus, was next called—He said that he had
seen Baker in " bread-bags" on two or three occasions.
The first lieutenant ordered him to be put in bread-bags for
being dirty, and making away with his clothes.
By Captain Hillyar--You have never given me any order
respecting Baker being put in bread-bags since I have been
master at arms of the Cadmus.

By the Pre secutor—l cannot remember how many times
Lieutenant Lillingston gave orders for Baker to be put in
bread-bags. It was on two or three occasions. On the day
Captain Ross joined the ship I reported to Lieutenant Lil-
lingston that Bowles had reported to me that the boy's
head was " lousy." I received an order from the first
lieutenant that he was to be taken to the ship's head, where
his head was to be shaved, and scrubbed with sand and
canvass. I afterwards saw Baker's hair being cut close
with a pair of scissors by Bowles. I never said that Cap-
tain Hillyar ordered Baker to be put in bread-bags. I
was not in the Cadmus when at Santa Martha. On two or
three occasions when Lieutenant Lillingston has given the
order to put Baker in bread-bags Captain Hillyar has been
present. I have never received orderstoflflogogged roboayosfsrs aom
Captain Hillyar. I never saw any one
ibioliyng.scsrtounb.bed
with
gun. I have seen
dthirrteyewotihtherthbeoirysput
clothes.in bread-bags for
being careless and
—Were the orders you received from Lieuten-
antry ou the/order I received
Tlv LhietilniCesin°sgu—srttNono.
I carriedfaiirdt
from Lieutenant
Did you see theL
I gave the order I received
to Bowles. to Car
canvas?—
No.
Did with sand and
sand and
you order that he should be scrubbed
canvas ?---"Yes,
coiEvexciamtoinsaotrinebnbretahuerned—l gave Bowles the orders I re-
from Lieut. Lillingstobno.
instead, because of the soretshe
The order was that his (Baker's)
head was to be shaved. I ordered to be cut close
his hair
y•ThI altered the order. I received
until
five or six months after his •
not hear the boy beaten round the deck.on
the Cadmus the 3flth July, hair was cut. I was on board
Id
adyidthneobtosyeedestehietcbdo:
hwased punished.mw iythd duty t yr
Io tpnoee,blse
repure present ns- I did
all
Illwas on the lower
dane
boyscdk .pwuenlrties
oons ss
couldaw gun
t
have occurred without my becoming acquaintyedaowith it if
the order came from the quarter deck. In m
punishments I never included his being dressedcionubartead
Bakerue u ahetolhdcienacags
bags. I did not think it a punishment. The boy Baker
never complained to me of ill treatment. I have trafficed
with the ship's company in small stores, such as sardines.
I understood that I had Lieut. Lillingston's permission to
do so. I believ3 Baker was kept in bread bags because he
could not get slops, as he was indebted to the Crown, He
was a careless, dirty, and very bad boy. When in the bread
bags Baker got his full allowance of grog and provisions.
The other boys did so when in bread bags. The longest
period I have known a boy to be put in bread bags was a
fortnight at one time. I did not report to the surgeon that
the boy's head was full of sores. I did not consider it a
Punishment when a boy was in bread bags for a fortnight,
because he had no night watch, and had only to duty on the
lower deck. Baker was put in irons for security. The

longest time the boy was in irons was five or six days.
Baker was in irons at St. John's, N.B. During Captain
Hillyar's time I did not, when a punishment took place,
enter it without orders.

By Captain Hillyar—There were great facilities held out
for desertion at St. John's, N.B. We lost several men
there the first or second night wo went on the blocks. I
think Baker did his best to get away. Ho ran from under
the sentry's charge. When I came to the steerage I found
that the chief boatswain's mate was there with the boy.
By Captain Hillyat--I never knew Baker without clothes
under his bread-bag. I have never seen you, while you were
captain of the Cadmus, behave in a cruel, oppressive, and
unofficerlike manner to any of the boys or ship's company.
I have sever heard you give petty officers orders to thrash
the boys. There was nothing indecent in the boy's appear-
ance when he was in the bread-bag. I know that you had
Baker and other bad characters on the quarter-deck when
you said, " I shall apply to the admiral for your discharge
from the service as unfit for it." I remember the Admiralty
orders on naval courts-martial and discipline being received
on board, and to the best of my knowledge those orders were
complied with.

By Lieut. Lil►ingston—You never ordered me to strip
Baker as we were going from Halifax to St. John's, New
Brunswick. I never refused Baker permission to wash him-
self. To my knowledge Baker was not brought before you,
or any one else, on July 30th, nor did you see him on that
day. On July 30th, I reported to you that Baker was
"lousy," and in a very bad condition with sores. What-
ever directions you gave on that occasion were delivered
immediately on my reporting that Baker was in a filthy
condition. You did not give me any other orders about
Baker on that day. I have no reason to suppose that you
knew of, or had any connection with the boy's running from
the ship on the 30th of July, before the fact was reported to
you. You told me to bring the boy up, after he had run.
Baker was never, to my knowledge, put in bread-bags for
any other resaon than that he had no clothes, or none fit to
wear, from their filthy condition. I never stripped the boy
of his clothes, either by or without your orders. You have
never, to my knowledge, caused any man or boy in the ship
to be thrashed with rope's-end. Neither did you order any
other bey to be scrubbed with sand and canvas. I have
never known of any instance of cruelty and unkindness by
you to any of the crew since I have been in the ship. You
reprimanded me on one occasion, on the complaint of a boy
for having struck him.
By Captain Hillyar—l think you ordered two boys
besides Baker to be put in bread-bags. Their names were
Haynes and James ; one was for being dirty and having no
clothes, and the other for positively refusing to obey the
senior lieutenant's orders and also mine. Baker was never
stripped when in the bread-bags, but had always one suit
on, bad or good. The boy wore trousers. (Witness had
previously stated that one of the reasons for pitting the boy
in a bread-bag dress was because he had no clothes, save
one or two dirty rags.)

Witness was further examined as to proceedings on board
the Cadmus, his replies throughout being anything but
straightforward, after which the court adjourned until next
morning.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE,

HOME CIRCUIT.-KINGSTON, April 7.

(Before the Lord Chief Justice and a Special Jury.)

MYER AND ANOTHER V. BARNETT.

This action, which was to recover a balance of £l,BOO,
under a contract entered into by the plaintiffs, who are gun
manufacturers at Liege, for the delivery of 20,000 rifle bar-
rels to the defendant, for the use of the American Govern-
ment, was resumed to-day.

Mr. Bovill, Q.C., and Sir G. Honyman, were for the
plaintiffs; and Mr. Lush, Q.C., and Mr. Murphy for the
defendant.

The nature of the action was of a very dry and uninte-
resting characting, and this morning a number of witnesses
were examined, with a view to make out the defendant's
plea, that the rifles that were supplied were not according
to sample, and were of a different gauge to those contracted
for, and the evidence appeared to make out both these points
in a most satisfactory manner.

The jury, in the result, without any hesitation, returned
a verdict for the defendant.

(Before Mr. Justice Wightman and a Common Jury.)

ROBERTS T. BROWN.

This was an action of a rather peculiar nature, the plain-
tiff alleging that the defendant had entered into an agree-
ment with him that he should have the use of a racehorse
called the Colleen Bawn, for the space of one year, under
certain conditions, and he sued for damages in consequence
of his having broken that agreement. The defendant did
not deny that he had made the agreement referred to in the
declaration, but alleged that he had broken it with the con-
sent of the plaintiff.

Sergeant Parry and Mr. Garth were for the plaintiff ; and
Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Hannen for the defendant.

The case was opened by the learned counsel for the plain-
tiff as one which the latter had been compelled to bring for
the purpose of vindicating his character, but the facts did not
appear at all to justify such a suggestion, although the cir-
cumstances connected with the case were certainly, as above
stated, rather peculiar, The plaintiff, it appeared, is pay-
master of the 12th Lancers, and defendant is assistant-sur-
geon to the 18th Hussars; they were both stationed at Al-
dershot, and formerly were on very friendly terms. The
defendant had purchased a racing mare called the Colleen
Bawn some time previous to the year 1862, and she had
won one race, but not being well up in racing affairs, it
seemed that he consulted Captain Roberts, who had made
racing a favourite occupation, and who had himself ridden
in several races as a gentleman jockey, as to what was best
to be done with the mare, and in March of last year an
agreement was drawn up between them, the tet ma of which
were that Colleen Bawn was to be placed in the hands of
Captain Roberts, and he was to enter her for any stakes he
thought fit, the money for those entries being paid by de-
fendant, and the latter also undertook to pay Capt. Roberts
10 guineas a month for the keep of the mare, and to find a
man to look after her, and he was to have one-third of all
the winnings. The mare did run at several races after this,
but she was unsuccessful on every occasion, and the plaintiff
alleged that her want of success was owing to the defendant
having interfered and entered her for stakes where she had
no chance of winning; and it appeared that in June the
defendant sent the mare to the stables of Mr. Payne, a horse
dealer, in Milton-street, Dorset-square, and she was sold by
him to a French horse dealer for £55, to be taken abroad.
Under these circumstances, the plaintiff now sought to re-
cover damages for the loss he alleged he had sustained by
the breach of engagement by the defendant.
Captain Roberts, the plaintiff, was examined at consider-
able length, and he proved a good many of the above facts,
and also said that if the mare had been entered for races
where she would have met animals of her own class, she
would have been much more successful, and vivald have
won a good many races during the twelve months. He did
not, however, mention any particular stake where this re-
sult was likely to have occurred.

Upon being cross-examined, he said the mare at the time,
or shortly before she came into his possession, had dreadful
bad feet ; there was also a tendency to spavin, and she was
" thick-winded," and he certainly did not consider her a
sound mare. (A laugh.) He was then questioned as to
money matters, and admitted that there had been some dis-
putes between him and the defendant in relation to money
he had represented he had paid for entering the mare for
several stakes. He also said the defendant had sued him
upon a £lOO bill, for which he declared that he had only
received £B3, and said that the rest was stopped, as he sup-
posed, for interest ; and it appeared that the present action
was not commenced until after the defendant had taken pro-
ceedings against him in reference to this bill for £lOO.

Mr. Hawkins, in his address to the jury for the defendant,
contended that there was not the slightest ground for such
an action being brought, and he really could not understand
what damage the plaintiff had sustained. It was admitted
that the only advantage he could have derived from the
transaction was by the mare winning the races for which
she was entered, and he urged that it was not very likely
that such an animal as the one described, lame, thick winded,
and with a tendency to spavin, would have been very suc-
cessful as a racehorse. (A laugh.)
The defendant was then examined, and he contradicted
Captain Roberts in almost every one of the statements he
had made in reference to the transaction. He admitted
that he had entered into the agreement in question ori-
ginally with the plaintiff, and said that in all the races
she ran subsequently she was entered with the sanction
of the plaintiff, and she was unsuccessful on every occa-
sion, and they both agreed that it would be better to sell
her, and the plaintiff himself said that he would try to
do so. The defendant also stated that he had ascer-
tained that Captain Roberts had charged him for
stakes that he had never paid, and with regard to the £lOO
bill, he declared that he gave him £93 in money, and that
he also received £7 lOs for a horse that was sold which be-
longed to him (the defendant), so that in point of fact he re-
ceived £lOO lOs for his £lOO bill, and he did not charge him
a farthing for interest. The defendant also swore positively
that when the XICO bill was given he and Capt. Roberts
mutually a greed to cancel the agreement that had been en-
tered into, and the plaintiff promised to destroy it.

Sergeant Parry, in replying upon the whole case, con-
tended that a question of character was involved, and he
complained of the defendant having instructed his counsel
to drag before the court the pecuniary affairs of the plain-
tiff, which, he submitted, had nothing whatever to do with
the real question at issue between the parties. Ho then
said that although the mare, probably, was not in good con-
dition at the time the plaintiff first had her placed in his
shhaeTwh would, uld,
learnedn
hands, still she improved under his care, and if the agree-
ment had been fairly carried out, and she had been
entitledjudi-
ciouslytowhicenhteerewdasto contend with animals of her own class,
to deliberate. In a short
woueldbefeon a source of profit to the plaintiff, and the jury
o djoundbgte, havehay. i
nweo n several of these stakes, and
which he
their own estimate of the amount of damages
p, the jury retired
time„ tshuemymreetduLd
gave a verdict for the plaintiff—damages, one farthing.
OXFORD CIRCITI.T.—G
(Before Mr.into court, and
Justicen-mu, April 6.
Crorapton
CORBETT V. PALMER AND HUB Nn .)
DA
-..--PREACH OF PRO•

MISS OF MARRIAGn.
This was an action brought by Mr. Corbett, clerk to the
Worcestershire and Staffordshire Canal Company, against