Page:ChroniclesofEarlyMelbournevol.1.pdf/425

Mr. Gavin Ralston, a wine and spirit merchant, declared that Mrs. Kavenagh, of the Brian Boru, called at his place of business, bought and paid for a parcel of wine to be delivered at the residence of Major St. John, yvhich yvas accordingly done. Mrs. Kavenagh was next placed in the witness box, and admitted having ordered the wine at Ralston's to be sent as a complimentary gift to the Major; but it was purely a voluntary friendship offering, for no one had asked her to do so. Mr. Joseph C. Passmore, painter and paperhanger, afterwards the licensee of the Shakespeare Hotel, testified that in February, 1847, he obtained a transfer of license from Mr. M . J. Davies. About that time he used to do glazier workforMajor St. John to the extent of some thirty shillings per month, and did not remember giving any receipts in payment. H a d no knoyvledge of a receipt of his for £ 5 . There was an item of £ 1 5s. for ale in his books, marked "paid," but he knew nothing more about it. H a d previously sent some ale as a present to the Major, but could not say whether he ever got cash for it, though it yvas booked as settled. T h e present was m a d e without being asked for, or letting the Major know anything about it. Mr. Germain Nicholson, grocer, Collins Street, deposed, in substance, that, previous to the 28th June, 1848, he had several conversations with the plaintiff respecting the transfer for a license for Crown lands, for yvhich the consideration yvas to be pecuniary assistance by bill accommodation or otherwise. O n application being m a d e in the matter, the plaintiff said, " O h ! 'tis all right," and then asked witness to oblige him yvith the loan of some money, which he yvould secure by a lien upon stock he had. In reply as to the amount required, the Major said about £ 4 0 0 yvould do, and the witness rejoined that such a sum could not be spared. S o m e time after the parties again met, and yvitness asked the Major to sanction the transfer of old Craven's run, but was told it could not be thought of. In a subsequent conversation the Major intimated that a less s u m than previously mentioned would suffice for his then requirements, whereupon the yvitness suggested that if the two lots of land about which they had spoken were put together, he yvould then probably be prepared to accede to some pecuniary accommodation, and the Major at once answered, " I'll do it." A proposition yvas then m a d e for yvitness to give his acceptance for £ 2 5 0 , which he took some time to consider, and ultimately transmitted a written refusal. T h e Major, on seeing witness some time after, remarked that it did not matter, the run yvas still in his hands, and he could obtain the money he wanted elsewhere. A few days subsequently, on the parties meeting in the street, the Major declared that, if accommodated with the £ 4 0 0 , the license could be at once obtained. They again met on 28th June, when the Major thus accosted the yvitness: "Well, so you have been telling Johnny Fawkner that I wanted to get £ 4 0 0 from you;" to which yvitness replied that he had not spoken to Fawkner on the subject. Again, after this, Bloomfield (the City Chief-Constable) called upon the witness to say that "Major St. John wished to see him," but he refused, remarking that "the public might talk about it." H e had an objection to go to the Major's private residence; but, coming across him again in the street, he renewed the subject of the transfer of the run, yvhen St. John curtly replied : " It can't be done." T h e witness (who, it seems, had been acting for a third party) m a d e a further appeal to the Major, by saying: " Major, I know you have an open heart, and will do a poor m a n a service;" wmereat the Major laconically exclaimed : " Indeed I won't." H e furthermore declared that a less amount than £ 4 0 0 would do, but the witness answered he could not afford it, and the Major left, with this parting intimation : " If you'll do that for me, I'll do the otherforyou." O n cross-examination the witness admitted that on one occasion the plaintiff told him that M r . Latrobe had been consulted in the matter, and what was wanted in the run-transfer could not be done. H e also remembered it being said that the transfer and the loan yvere to be different transactions; and he yvas to have a lien to secure the money. Mr. D. C. McArthur, manager of the Bank of Australasia, was called to prove a conversation which the plaintiff had had with him about the discounting of a bill, in the course of which Nicholson's n a m e yvas mentioned. H e advised the plaintiff, if he wanted money, to raise it on his stock in the usual business way, through some of the Melbourne auctioneers, as a private transaction, for any dealing with Nicholson in the manner mentioned might give rise to suspicions. This closed the defendant's case, and several witnesses were produced to rebut some of the testimony given on the other side. O n e John Mooney was examined, with the intention of showing that the two guineas referred to by the witnesses Bear, was the result of a transaction arising out of some cattle dealing,