Page 4 Advertisements Column 2

Wellington Independent, Volume XXII, Issue 2667, 14 April 1868, Page 4

Pure Benevolence. — As philanthropy combined with determination and baoked by ample means deserves, even if it may not command success, and as too much publicity cannot be giyen to a -worthy project, we re-publish, the following letter, which has been received by a Bubaltern in a marching regiment quartered at Aldershott :— " Sir, — Having determined to put tho gentlemen in her Majesty's service on a better footing than they have hitherto been placed, and having the command of a largo capital, should you at any timo rcquiro an advance I shall be. happy' to lot you have the same immediately on your note of hand at £10 for the £100 for three months, and in perfect confidence. — Tour obedient servant, — D.L. P.S.— Residing as above, I can attend to business at any hour." A MELBOITRNE Al/DERMAN IN TROUBLE. — Mr Alderman Hughes has been figuring in the Melbourne Courts as defendant in an action for slander. The plaintiffs were Robert and Margaret Coles, of the Builders' Arms Hotel, Carlton, and tho alleged slander consisted in a statement made by Mr Hughes, in the. bar of the hotel and in the presence of a number of persons, to the effect that Mrs Coles had slept with a married man named Robertson. He added that Mra Coles told him so. In defending the action, Mr Hughes did not deny having made use of the statement imputed to him, but said that he merely alluded to what Mrs Colea had once told him in a joke, viz., that on Robertson's wedding night, she was at his house with other company, but the place was bo full that she had to go to bed with the bride and bridegroom. That such an occurrence took place, Mr Robertson emphatically denied on oath, and Mrs Coles positively swore that she had never made any statement of the kind to Hughes. In addition to the statement in question, it was asserted that on the 2nd of January, Hughes had addressed to Mrs Colea f^p language of altogether too disgusting a nature for publication. The jury fouad.for: the plaintiffs, damages Is, which amount his Honor certified should carry costs,, having, previously informed the jury that, in the present state of the law, they could not award substantial ; damages unless plaintiff could prove that he had been injured in business by the slander.