SERIOUS ACCIDENT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 6190, 10 December 1881, Page 2 (Supplement)

SERIOUS ACCIDENT.

A very painful accident happened on Wednesday to Mias O'Connor, a sister-in-law of Mr : D. Sinnott, of Titri, which would without doubt have resulted fatally had it not been for the courage and presence of mind of ono of the employes on tho farm, Sir Hugh Sweeney. \ Some 20 cows had been driven in from a distant part of the estate .(where tije animals had rarely, if ever, come into contact with human bemgs) for the purpose of having their calves separated from them. As this was a somewhat difficult operatj/m, all hands were called upon toasaiat, Misa O'Connor among the number. An infuriated cow broke f j*om the mob and rushed at that young lady, who, seeing her danger, and being unable to escape, threw herself upon the ground, in the tope that the animal would run over her, and that she might; be abl*3 to reach a place of aafety before it could; renew the attack. Unfortunately no such opportunity was given, and ahe WDS tossed about the field in a fearfully dansjerons manner. I Mr Sweeney,'who was on horseback, savy from a distance tlie critical situation of the lady,; and rendered speedy assistance.. He arrived none too soon, for the cow had gone down on its knees as if determined to finish the deadly

-work. Hastily dismounting, he threw himself upon the young lady, and shielded'ber with his] *7Jjody. His action fortunately startled tho cow, 1 and cauaed it to spring back; in doing so it caught sight of Mr and Mra _ Sinnott a little way off, and charged in their direction, but all ware enabled to escape. Miss O'Connor's right leg was fearfully torn from tlie ankle to tlie knee, the muscles in places being completely savored from their attachments. Sweeney sustained a few cuts about the head, but thoy] were pot of much consequence. Dr Reid gives us a b&d account of Miss O'Connor's condition/, but it is in hopes that ho will be able to effect a cui-e-of the wound, and that it will not be necessary to resort to amputation,—Bruce Herald.

THE GREY GOVERNMENT AND EXTRAVAGANCE. TO THE EDITOR.

gm,—l aiii'ays felt that you knew lftlto ,<?r nctliing of Colonial finance, and your note ta my letter of thia inorning_ provea I was right. -■* ~-.- f~r o. iieriod—aix months nf which time the Grey G'overswrtfint were not in office— the receipts fell bejow the expenditure the Government was guilty .of extravagance, is a peculiar statement. I want you to name the Items of expenditure that might or Hipald have been stopped. Can you; nay, dare you f [ laiow you cannot; but m slandering other -,y,^ n J ynn prefer to deal m vague general! - ' As to what I said about Mr Pick, I regret tbat you should, by repeating my name at length, imagine that offends me. lam rather proud of signing my|first name aUcngth. 1 ask you to name one statement of mine incorrect. ■{* there a runholder or a runholders' candidate ii, Opposition ? If Mr Dick is not to ba judged by the company he politically keeps, I am at z. losa to understand what a political party means. Instead of waxing wroth and accusing me of " reprehensible disingenuousnesa " —a not unusual phraso of yours when you are aTlf , r y it would, I think, be more becoming an .editor of a high-clitao journal to meet facta by facts—not by abuse,—l am, &c, Robert Stout.

TWe shall in duo time giye Ml' Stout ample proof tbat we do knowsomething.of t|)o financea of New Zealand. For the present our .columns are" crowded with other matter. As to our imagining that the use of his Christian name once in tho course of our article could offend bim such an idea never entered onr mmd. The mere suggestion of offence: seems to ns puerile jn the extreme.—Ed. V. V. I.J

THE NEW LICENSING ACT.

TO THE EDITOIt. Sin, —I owe your correspondent " Englishman" an apology, which 1 now tender him, for having overlooked his letter of Novomber 23rd. I saw it for tlie first time this morning when looking over a file of your paper to find something else. 1 do not recognise the treacherous nature of the ground on which I tread. My step is fiim and confident. "Englishman" is right in stating that tlie contract of which I speak is "one made between the State and the subject." He is wrong when he says "Under this contract' tlie State can withdraw from its performance of its portion of the contract at any time ; the subject cannot." The boot, if anywhere, is on tho other leg. Tho publican can close his bar and refrain from the sale of liquor at any moment. I at all events know of nothing whatever to prevent him. Ho cannot be prevented by the State from selling liquor, according to the terms of liis contract, at any time during its continuance. If this is not the case, will "Englishman " kindly inform me how or by what means it is to be done ?

I think "Englishman" is hardly accurate, certainly he is not clear, in lu3 statement of the essence of a contract. Would it not "be more correct to say tliat the essence of a contract is the provision that each of the contracting parties shall be equally bound by the conditions and specifications on which tlie contract is based.

Before a contract can be entered into, the contracting parties must agree aa to what the contract is to be for. Tliey must set forth in a specification the details of the work to be done, and the conditions on which the contract to do the required work is to be taken.

In the case of the licensed liquor trade, the would-be publican goes to the Government or the State, represented by tlio Licensing Bench, and says, "I want to obtain the privilege of selling grog."—" Very well," replies the chairman of the Bench. "Here, in the Licensing Act, are tlie terms and conditions, tlie specifications, on which tho State is prepared to allow anyone to enjoy the privilege you desire. If you are willing to enter into a contract witli tho State on tho terms herein sot forth, we are prepared to allow you the privilege applied for." Tho applicant may then examine these conditions and specifications, and aay yes or no. If he accepts, he haa no right afterwards to complain that he ia dealt unfairly with, if the terms of hia contract are too hard for hi in to make a profit out of it. But it may lie fairly replied that new conditions have been introduced into the contract without tho consent of tlie contracting parties. Tliere ia a good deal of reason in this reply, and tlie question may be raised, can tlie new Act bo equitably enforced against those who accepted license under the old Act? To that question I am not prepared to give a vory positive answer. At present lam disposed to reply in the negative. I am inclined to the opinion that the new Act should not be put in force till the expiry of the present contracts : that will bo at the lapsing by effluxion of all existing licenses, which will take place on the 30th of June next. Then new contracts havo to be entered into, and the conditions may be varied at the pleasure of the contracting parties. The State will then say, " The conditions on which alone we will enter into a contract with anyone by which they will bo g'perinittedj to sell grog Jare [set forth in the now Licensing Act." If anyone now selling liquor does not wish to make a new contract on the new ..terms, nothing on earth can compel him. Where, then, would be tlie injustice of which " Englishman " complains. But this is a side issue. The real question between "Englishman" and myself is tlie oli'oct of the Sunday Closing Act in Ireland on the drunkenness of that country.

Having been unable to find the return mentioned by "Englishman," I have had to fall back on 'such as I could find. I have given "Englishman" tho bonefit of these in my letters already published. I must leavo my readers to form their own opinion of the value and reliability of the statistics, &c, produced.

I do not desire to take advantage of your correspondent, but he must forgive me if I express my doubt as to the accuracy of his recollection. Until we have somo more definite information respecting tho returns mentioned by "Englishman," I shall entertain tho opinion that "Englishman's" memory has played him false in thia matter. It does so also. I think in hia last letter in which he said, " I gave him the dates of the passing of tlie Act and of the returns presented to tho House of Commons." What "Englishman"said waa, "The Act was passed in August, IS7B, and the return I refer to was presented last year." Thia can hardly be called giving one a date, so far at least as tho disputed return is concerned. At all events I have aa yet failed to find the return or any mention of it, save that made by " Englishman."—l am, &c., Anglo-Saxon. December Sth.