The Sun.
London, England, 1869-05-07 00:00:00

MR. MILNER GIBSON AT ASHTON.

There was a great Liberal demonstration at Ashton on
Wednesday, upon the occasion of a presentation being
made on behalf of the Liberal electors of that borough to
Mr. T.
,Milner Gibson, its late representative, and to Mrs.
Gibson.

Mr. Gibson, in the course of his speech, said that
the present Ministry bad done their work well, and
had fulfilled the expectations of most reasonable Liberals.
The people had ratified the policy which the
Government was pursuing in reference to Ireland, a
policy which bad really nothing to do with any religious
controversy whatsoever. It implied no attack upon Pro-
testantism nor upon Roman Catholicism ; it implied
nothing more than that England must accept the
situation in which Ireland is—the fact that Ireland is
peopled by a great majority professing the Roman
Catholic religion, and that it is not expedient to
maintain a Protestant State establishment for the use of a
Roman Catholic population. Mr. Gibson concluded
by thanking the meeting for their kindness, and
Issuring them of his continued interest in Ashton and its
people.

LORD NAPIER OF MAGDALA AND MR.

RA SSAM.

The evening papers publish the reply of Mr. Rassam
to Lord Napier in the matter of the presents to the King
of Abyssinia before the battle of Magdala. It contains
the following paragraph :—" Sir Robert Napier, in the
presence of Colonel Merewether and Mr. Munzinger,
issked me to repeat to him the conversation that
had taken place when I translated King Theo-
lore's letter. I accordingly did so, and repeated
my statement that, in answer to Samuel's query
about the present of cows and sheep, his Excellency had
said that he accepted them. Thereupon Sir Robert
Napier requested me to put my statement on paper. I
'eft the tent for that purpose, and in conjunction with
Lieutenant Prideaux, wrote, to the best of my re-
,ollection (for I did not keep a copy of the memo-
randum), as follows :—That the King had written to
say that that day being Easter he hoped the Com-
mander-in-Chief would allow him to send 1,000
:ows and 500 sheep as a breakfast for the British troops ;
snd that when Samuel inquired what answer he was
;o give the King his Excellency replied, ' I accept
;hem,' or words to that effect. I then returned
:o the Commander-in-Chief's tent, and delivered the
memorandum to his Excellency in the presence of Colonel
Merewether and Mr. Munzinger, who were
still there. Nothing further was said on the
subject, and I took it for granted that my
plain statement was as satisfactory as it was indisputable."
l'he Pall Mall Gazette says: "It will be desirable that
Lord Napier should shew how, with the discussion alleged
.o have taken place on the occasion still fresh in his re-
membrance, and especially with the written memoran-
mum which Mr. Rassam avers that he drew up at the
:ime, at his lordship's request, in his possession, his
ordship could indite the following passage in his letter
o the Secretary of State for India When Mr.
llassam's report first came to my notice in England,
my own recollection of the details attending the
.ransaction of the letter was at variance with Mr.
Rassana's account, but my recollection being very indis-
;islet, and considering Mr. Rassam simply as a translator,
felt that I should not be justified in impugning the
sccuracy of his deliberate statement, on the strength of
my own imperfect rememberance of what at the time ap-
peared unimportant.' If the statement in Mr. Rassam's
report was inaccurate, why was it not impugned when the
illeged written memorandum, containing the identical
statement, was first given to Lord Napier on the day that
Theodore's letter was translated?"

THE LATE CONFEDERATE GOVEI?NMEN2
AND ITS AGENTS.

On Thursday morning Vice-Chancellor James gave judg-
nent in the case of " The United States of America v.
Nlcßae," which was instituted by the United States
lilovemment as successors de facto to all the property
)f the late Confederate Government, against the
defendant who had been one of the agents in England of
;hat Government to obtain an account and delivery and
payment by him of all moneys and goods in his hands as
inch agent.
The court had already refused to allow the plaintiffs to
)btain discovery from the defendant, and now decided the
luestion of the plaintiffs' right to relief.
His Honour held that as the plaintiffs could not establish
tied did not claim any privity between themselves and the
defendant, inasmuch as they carefully abstained from recog-
aising the validity of any acts of the Confederate Govern-
ment, or their relations with their agents, no case was
made out for relief against the defendant. The
plaintiffs might have shewn, as in fact was clear, that
:he defendant had received large sums on account of the
confederate Government, but in the position in which
she plaintiffs placed themselves by their pleading, this
;aye them no right as against the defendant. There was
lot a tittle of evidence to shew that the defendant had
-eceived any property belonging to the plaintiffs. The
Dill must therefore be dismissed with costs.