View allAll Photos Tagged docket
Just sold the complete set after 61 years..
see the delivery docket here.
www.flickr.com/photos/spelio/7286540464/
The actual receipt for them has just turned up in a folder Helen had for the past 20 years, see below soon.
New Delhi: Car shares on Wednesday fell by way of up to 3% after the Supreme Court docket banned the sale and registration of automobiles which aren’t compliant with BS IV emission norms from 1 April throughout u . S ..
Shares of Hero MotoCorp went down with the aid of 3.15%, Ashok...
weblistposting.com/bs-iii-ban-automobile-shares-fall-up-t... weblistposting.com/bs-iii-ban-automobile-shares-fall-up-t... weblistposting.com/
Okay, so some trendy restaurants have open kitchens. But for the most part chefs are the unsung and unseen heros of restaurants.
A Civil War reenactment at the Delaware County Historical Association (New York) on July 19, 2015.
This was one heck of a hot summer day. The Battle of Little Round Top was on the docket for that day.
The legal needs of our men and women in uniform were front and center for the launch of the Baltimore City District Court Veterans Treatment Docket on October 13, 2015, at the Eastside Courthouse in Baltimore. The Honorable Halee F. Weinstein, herself a U.S. Army veteran, presided over the docket, the first District Court docket of its kind in the state. Attending luminaries included Chief Judge John P. Morrissey, District Court of Maryland; Dr. Adam M. Robinson, Jr., Director of the VA Maryland Health Care System; and Major General Linda L. Singh, Adjutant General of the Maryland National Guard.
via
In a welcome response to the growing epidemic of drug and alcohol abuse among members of the legal profession, the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) of the USPTO announced today it has initiated a new disciplinary diversion program that focuses on treatment rather than punishment. The OED’s Diversion Program, which will initially begin as a two-year “pilot program,” aligns the USPTO with more than 30 state attorney discipline systems that presently offer alternative tracks to formal attorney discipline for minor ethics offenses that arise from addiction or mental health-related issues.
The OED’s program, which has been in the works for some time, comes at a critical time period in the legal profession. Disciplinary counsel across the United States have increasingly come to recognize that the profession has a serious problem with drug and alcohol abuse. As we previously reported in our posts here (Feb. 8, 2016), here (July 12, 2016), and here (Feb. 9, 2017), lawyers suffer from alcoholism and drug addiction at a rate that is grossly disproportionate to the rates of addiction in other professions and in the general population.
Several years ago, the ABA’s Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs and the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation commissioned a study of 15,000 attorneys across 19 states. Their research found that between 21% and 36% of lawyers drink at levels consistent with an alcohol use disorder. For comparison, those numbers are roughly 3-5 times higher than the government estimates for alcohol use disorders in the general population. A report summarizing the research was published in the Journal of Addiction Medicine in February 2016 (here). The ABA-Hazelden report stated: “Compared with other populations, we find the significantly higher prevalence of problematic alcohol use among attorneys to be compelling and suggestive of the need for tailored, profession-informed services.”
And it is not just alcohol that is the problem. Earlier this week, President Trump declared the opioid crisis to be a national public health emergency. Some reports have referred to the opioid epidemic as “the most widespread and deadly drug crisis in the nation’s history.”
The Purpose of Diversion
Traditional attorney discipline rules and procedures generally focus on protecting the public by, in effect, punishing the lawyer. Traditional means of discipline typically involve a license suspension, reprimand, or other form of public discipline. However, drug or alcohol abuse, or other mental health issue, sometimes plays a significant role in cases involving violation of the rules of professional conduct.
The idea behind diversion is to treat the root cause by taking the practitioner out of the realm of the disciplinary system. It is hoped that by focusing on getting practitioners the proper medical care and treatment, both the public and the bar will benefit. USPTO Acting Director Joseph Matal echoed these interests in a press release issued today:
We’re hopeful that this pilot program will align our agency with best practices established in other states while allowing practitioners a fair chance to rectify previous misconduct and allow them to move forward in a productive manner.
The OED’s Diversion Program is modeled after relevant provisions of the American Bar Association’s Model Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement (Model Rules), in particular, Model Rules 9 and 10. The general parameters of the Diversion Program are published here.
The following provides some basic information about the OED’s Diversion Pilot Program.
Is diversion just limited to those who abuse drugs or alcohol?
No, although that is certainly one part of it. The diversion program is available to practitioners whose physical, mental, or emotional health issues (e.g., issues tied to substance/alcohol abuse) or law practice management issues (e.g., inadequate client communication or docket management) resulted in minor misconduct and little, if any, harm to a client.
Who qualifies for OED diversion?
Not all practitioners will qualify. Diversion only is available for practitioners who engaged in “lesser misconduct.” While not a defined term, per ABA Model Rule 9, “lesser misconduct” generally means misconduct that would not warrant a sanction restricting the practitioner’s license to practice law—i.e. a suspension or exclusion.
In addition, to qualify for diversion, the practitioner’s misconduct at issue must not have:
(1) involved the misappropriation of funds;
(2) resulted in substantial prejudice to a client or other person;
(3) be of the same nature as misconduct for which the practitioner has been disciplined within the last five years;
(4) involved dishonesty, deceit, fraud or misrepresentation by the practitioner; or
(5) constituted a “serious crime” as that term is defined in 37 C.F.R. § 11.1 (essentially any felony or a lesser crime that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects).
Thus, for example, an attorney who stole client trust funds to fund a drug habit would not be eligible. On the other hand, a practitioner who was convicted of misdemeanor possession could qualify assuming none of the other exceptions applied.
If I qualify, will I automatically be offered diversion?
The answer is definitely maybe. It is anticipated or hoped by OED Director William Covey that qualifying individuals will be able to take the diversion path. Nevertheless, the OED Director has discretion to consider the following criteria in determining whether a practitioner who engaged in minor misconduct and who otherwise qualifies will still be offered the opportunity for diversion:
(1) whether the sanction is likely to be no more severe than a reprimand;
(2) whether diversion was already attempted and failed;
(3) whether participation could benefit the practitioner and accomplish the goals of the program; and
(4) the existence or absence of aggravating factors (such as practitioner’s lack of remorse, failure to recognize wrongdoing, and failure to cooperate with the OED) or mitigating factors (such as lack of experience in the practice of law, offers to make restitution, and cooperative attitude with the OED).
The decision to offer diversion will be made on a case-by-case basis, and the burden will be on the practitioner seeking diversion to demonstrate to the OED Director’s satisfaction that the practitioner qualifies and that diversion is appropriate in light of the above-referenced criteria.
If I am accepted into diversion, how does that work?
Assuming the practitioner qualifies and the OED Director has agreed to offer diversion in lieu of discipline, the OED Director and the practitioner shall negotiate a contract, the terms of which shall be tailored to the individual circumstances of the practitioner and the misconduct alleged. In each case, the contract shall be signed by the practitioner and the OED Director.
Generally speaking, the contract will call for the lawyer to participate for a period of time in some type of formal program. Such programs may include law office management assistance, state bar sponsored substance and mental health initiatives (such as the Virginia State Bar’s “Lawyers Helping Lawyers” program), psychological counseling, continuing legal education programs, and professional responsibility classes. Depending upon the type of misconduct and the needs of the practitioner and public, an appropriate diversion program might also include a practice monitor. It is anticipated that the diversion contract will also require some type of periodic reporting, either by the practitioner or a third party (or both).
What happens if I breach my diversion contract?
It depends. The contract itself should define what happens if the terms are breached by the practitioner. It is anticipated that in the event a breach occurs, the practitioner could be subject to the usual attorney ethics investigation and disciplinary process for the conduct that resulted in the breach of the contract. However, as the present program is presently envisioned, the practitioner will not be subject to discipline for his or her original misconduct (that is, the conduct that led to the practitioner’s entry into the diversion program in the first place).
Am I required to enter into diversion?
No. Practitioners are not required to seek diversion. Unless a qualifying practitioner requests consideration for entry into a diversion program, the matter will be handled just as though no offer of referral was extended. This means that the normal investigatory procedures may be followed. Furthermore, at the end of the usual investigation not involving diversion, the OED Director will continue to retain the discretion to dismiss the matter, issue a non-disciplinary warning, refer the practitioner for formal ethics charges, or enter into a settlement agreement with the practitioner.
Will the public learn about my diversion?
No. Many practitioners who face discipline are concerned about what information will be disclosed to the public (including clients and competitors) concerning their situation. Investigations by the Office of Enrollment and Discipline are confidential, and even the existence or non-existence of an ethics investigation is protected by The Privacy Act.
For practitioners who enter into disciplinary diversion agreements, the OED will not publish the contract or provide notice to the public that the practitioner is party to a diversion contract.
Must I self-report my USPTO diversion to my state bar?
Every state has its own rules dictating when a member of that state’s bar must self-report their misconduct. For example, state bars normally require practitioners to self-report when they have been the subject of “public” ethical discipline by another jurisdiction. A practitioner’s acceptance into the OED’s Diversion Program is neither public nor discipline.
Entry into the OED Program does not necessarily mean that the practitioner is absolved of all self-reporting obligations. For example, many states require their members to self-report if they are convicted of a crime. A practitioner who receives a disciplinary diversion from the USPTO based upon, for example, a drunk driving conviction might be required to report their conviction to their state bar even if they are not required to report the non-disciplinary diversion by the USPTO. Thus, practitioners must continue to be mindful of their own state bar’s self-reporting requirements to determine whether self-reporting of their misconduct is required.
Will I need to report entry into the USPTO diversion program to my malpractice carrier?
That would be highly unlikely. Most malpractice carriers require practitioners to report instances where they have been publicly disciplined. Again, the OED Diversion Program is neither public nor discipline. Nevertheless, the underlying conduct that led to the disciplinary diversion may need to be reported to the practitioner’s insurance carrier. Practitioners should therefore be mindful of the terms of their malpractice insurance so that they may determine if reporting to their carrier is warranted.
Conclusion
Diversion programs provide disciplinary counsel with an alternative mechanism for protecting the public without unnecessarily punishing an attorney whose chief issue is alcohol, substance abuse, or other qualifying types of behavior. The USPTO should be applauded for recognizing the need for this alternative to discipline.
www.ipethicslaw.com/oed-launches-diversion-program-as-alt...
The legal needs of our men and women in uniform were front and center for the launch of the Baltimore City District Court Veterans Treatment Docket on October 13, 2015, at the Eastside Courthouse in Baltimore. The Honorable Halee F. Weinstein, herself a U.S. Army veteran, presided over the docket, the first District Court docket of its kind in the state. Attending luminaries included Chief Judge John P. Morrissey, District Court of Maryland; Dr. Adam M. Robinson, Jr., Director of the VA Maryland Health Care System; and Major General Linda L. Singh, Adjutant General of the Maryland National Guard.
The owners of 5200 St. Claude Ave. have proposed demolishing the Creole cottage pictured below for the development of a strip-mall type development with 5 stores.
Board of Zoning Adjustments Docket Item Details:
Docket Number: 093-10 DS
Applicant or Agent: 5200 St. Claude Avenue LLC
Property Location: 5200 St. Claude Avenue Zip: 70117
Bounding Streets: St. Claude Ave., Egania, N. Rampart, & Lizardi Sts.
Square Number: 338 Lots: 1 and B
Zoning District: C-1 General Commercial ZBM: E-14
Historic District: N/A Planning District: 8
Existing Use: Retail (To Be Demolished)
Proposed Use: Retail
Request Citation: This request is for variances from the provisions of Article 5, Section 5.5.7 (Table 5.G) and Article 15, Section 15.2.1 (Table 15.A) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance .
Request:
This request is to permit the construction of a retail establishment with insufficient minimum yard on a side street when the rear yard abuts a residential district, minimum rear yard abutting a residential district, and insufficient off-street parking.
Requested Waivers:
Section 5.7.7 (Table 5.G) – Minimum Yard on a Side Street
Required: 10’ Provided: 0’ Waiver: 10’
Section 4.6.7 (Table 4.F) – Minimum Depth of Rear Yard Abutting a Residential District
Required: 20’ Provided: 0’ Waiver: 20’
Section 15.2.1 (Table 15.A) – Off-Street Parking
Required: 18 Spaces Provided: 14 Spaces Waiver: 4 Spaces
from ift.tt/1abZu3g
Commonwealth v. D.M. (Preliminary Hearing)
Charge/Violation: 18 § 2701 §§A1 – Simple Assault - (Misdemeanor 2)
18 §2705 – Recklessly Endangering Another Person – (Misdemeanor 2)
Case Summary:
According to the Affidavit of Probable Cause in this case, Washington Township Police were dispatched to a woman’s home to check on her. Upon arrival Police observe blood and force entry into the residence. While Police were checking the residence, Defendant arrived at the scene. Washington Township Police then contacted the Pennsylvania State Police to take over the investigation. Pennsylvania State Police interviewed Defendant and later filed charges. Defendant contacted Attorney Paletta for representation at the Preliminary Hearing of this case.
Disposition:
At Defendant’s Preliminary Hearing in Fayette County, Attorney Paletta worked out an agreement with the District Attorney & the State Trooper. Defendant plead guilty to a Summary Harassment charge, which was moved to a lower court and assigned a Non-Traffic (NT) docket. All other charges (both Misdemeanor 2′s) were Withdrawn.
This disposition opens up the possibility of an Expungement, which if Granted, would mean that certain case information and records of this incident would be destroyed.
This handwritten record of Boston court cases lists several actions for default and debt, and an action arising from the sale of a ship.
Source: Lockwood, Belva Ann, 1830-1917. In the United States Court of Claims. Eastern and Emigrant Cherokees vs. the United States, no. 23,212 general docket. Findings of fact and brief / Belva A. Lockwood, counsel for Eastern and Emigrant Cherokees. (Washington, D.C. : The Standard Press, [1903?]); 23 cm. Hicks classification: SSNK L814. Call # Rare26 15-0033.
The legal needs of our men and women in uniform were front and center for the launch of the Baltimore City District Court Veterans Treatment Docket on October 13, 2015, at the Eastside Courthouse in Baltimore. The Honorable Halee F. Weinstein, herself a U.S. Army veteran, presided over the docket, the first District Court docket of its kind in the state. Attending luminaries included Chief Judge John P. Morrissey, District Court of Maryland; Dr. Adam M. Robinson, Jr., Director of the VA Maryland Health Care System; and Major General Linda L. Singh, Adjutant General of the Maryland National Guard.
most of them carry these bags, but less of them now give you little handwritten cards with yr bet on it - there's quite a few docket printers. it just isn't the same.
When you don't have a line of dockets bending back on itself, you can practice. Getting there. Still needs to fill up the cup, with larger, more curly fronds and a better looking/textured crema.
The legal needs of our men and women in uniform were front and center for the launch of the Baltimore City District Court Veterans Treatment Docket on October 13, 2015, at the Eastside Courthouse in Baltimore. The Honorable Halee F. Weinstein, herself a U.S. Army veteran, presided over the docket, the first District Court docket of its kind in the state. Attending luminaries included Chief Judge John P. Morrissey, District Court of Maryland; Dr. Adam M. Robinson, Jr., Director of the VA Maryland Health Care System; and Major General Linda L. Singh, Adjutant General of the Maryland National Guard.
Trying to get organized so I don't feel quite so overwhelmed. This side had the brainstorming list of things I've been trying to remember to do and the other side organized them by what I need to get done this week and what is on the docket for later.
A civil courtroom order will pressure a Canyon County Toll road District commissioner to smooth up vehicles, houses, and junk on his belongings or pay $a hundred,000 to his pals.
The civil court docket order for cleanup got here because of a lawsuit added by using buddies of John McEvoy,...
weblistposting.com/motorway-commissioner-need-to-smooth-p... weblistposting.com/motorway-commissioner-need-to-smooth-p... weblistposting.com/
Golden shimmery finish paper (250gsm) for docket style 3 fold card and mailing envelope. 3 inserts on Cream shimmery paper.
THE FIRE IN GREY-ST.
INQUEST ON THE CHINESE VICTIMS
An inquest was held this morning at Gleeson's Hotel to inquire into the circumstances surrounding the death of William Wah (cook) and Sing Hung (market gardener) who were accidentally burned at the laundry of Sam Kee in Grey-street, early on Friday morning. Dr. Philson (Coroner) look the evidence and Mr T. Quoi acted as interpreter. Constable Oliphant represented the police and Mr Ah Kew was present on behalf of his fellow countrymen. Mr James Collet was chosen foreman of the jury.
Sam Kee, who was sworn in the Chinese fashion, deposed, through Mr Quoi, that he was a laundryman and lived at the laundry destroyed by fire. He identified the bodies as those of William Wah and Sing Hung, and said they were natives of China. They lived in the laundry with witness and he last saw them alive at Ihe laundry at 11 p.m. on Thursday. At this time witness said both men were sober and they had not been smoking opium. Wah was 58 years of age and Hung 41. Deceased had no supper before going to bed. The house was 2 storeys and was lighted by gas only in the lower storey. Deceased slept in seperate rooms upstairs, but another man named Gee Tai slept in Wah's room. Witness slrpt in Hung's room. When they went to bed each had one sperm candle. Witness put out Wah's candle, but he was not sure if Hung's wick was extinguished. The candles stood on a table, and witness was soon asleep. He was awakened two or three hours afterwards by hearing a crackling noise below the stairs, and on getting up saw flame on the stairs. He gave the alarm and roused Hung up. He also called out to Wah, who got up. Witness did not go into the room, He then jumped out by a back window into the yard, some 20 feet below. He saw Gee Tai come out of a front window on to the verandah but he saw no other persons. At this time the Fire Brigade had not arrived. He saw the Fire Brigade afterwards endeavouring to put the fire out. Witness said the washing place was at the rear, where the boiler was located. It was in use on the day previous to the fire, Gee Tai put it out at 3 p.m. on Thursday. There was a charcoal stove at the back of the ironing room, he saw the fire there on Thursday put out. Witness believed the fire originated in the lower storey, but he could not say in which room.
The Foreman: This appears to be another case like the fire at the D.S.C. The Fire Brigade were not quick enough.
Constable Oliphant: I have a constable here to say that the Fire Brigade were present five minutes after the alarm was given. The fire was burning some time before the alarm was given.
Gee Tai, laundryman, who slept, on the premises, said the fire broke out in the lower storey. He did not know how the fire began.
To a Juryman: The windows of the house lifted, but there were no sash cords.
Constable R. Lanigan in his evidence said he was at the fire at 3.25 a.m. on Friday with Constable McDonald. At this time the fire had a good hold. It was mostly in Ihe back of the building. Only the inmates of the adjoining shop were then about. It was impossible to enter the building, but witness went into a right-of-way on the left of the laundry. Witness thought the fire originated in the second (drying) room on the ground floor, there were three rooms on the ground floor. The Fire Brigade arrived at the fire about the same time, as witness. He thought the Brigade were late in getting the alarm, but they succeeded in saving the adjoining building. The fire travelled very quickly. After the fire was extinguished witness found the remains of Wah face downwards in the front room upstairs facing the street. Wah was evidently more suffocated than burned. Sing Hung's body witness found in an adjoining room. The body was completely charred.
The Coroner said no evidence had been put before the jury to show how the fire originated. It would be best to return an open verdict.
The jury then returned a verdict 'That the deceased came to their death through burning, but their was no evidence to show how the fire originated.'
Mr Quoi then made a statement to the jury that gunpowder had been wrapped up and lighted and thrown into the shop by larrikins. The Chinese had been frequently annoyed in this way.
The funeral of the two Chinese leaves Mr Little's premises to-morrow afternoon.
paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS18980507.2.8
Plot 86: Hung Sing (41) 6/5/1898 – Gardener – Burns – disinterred for China
unmarked grave
CHINESE RESURRECTIONISTS AT WAIKUMETE.
DISINTERMENT OF CORPSES.
A GRUESOME SPECTACLE.
Time, 5.30 a.m., on a bitterly cold morning, in Waikumete Cemetery. Half-frozen, a pressman and a photographer attached to the staff of the "Graphic" make their way from the sexton's house to the furthermost corner of the cemetery, where is situated the section for Chinese and Atheists and aliens unprovided for elsewhere. A noise of hammering comes from the section, which is a good half-mile from the Anglican and Presbyterian allotments, and on arrival work found to be in full operation. The reception of our reporter and his photographic confrere is the reverse of friendly, and an immediate wrangle ensues amongst the gravediggers, evidently on the subject of the camera fiend's presence. A Chinese halfcaste European insists on their instant ejectment. The sexton, however, who has been handed proper credentials, proves a firm friend, and insists that he, and not any Chinaman, or half-caste Chinaman, is in change of the cemetery, and that he has his instructions. Things then calm down a trifle, but the work is resumed amidst much grumbling, and many vindictive and malignant glances are cast at the camera, and muttered curses uttered at the photographer as he dodges round looking for a chance shot. Once, indeed, when the shutter clicks, a furious celestial raises his pick in menace, and mutters a threat to do for the intruders, but he thinks better of it, and at the intervention of the European coffinmaker a truce is declared until arrival of "the boss." That individual presently arrives. He scans the permit; gloomily enough, and bids that the photos be taken forthwith, and the photographer and pressman depart. It being pointed out that there is no picture yet to take, and seeing that bluff has no effect, all active opposition as at once and finally dropped, and no difficulty put in the way of obtaining pictures or witnessing the proceedings save in giving mendacious information, lighting fires to obscure the graves with smoke, and endeavouring to tire out the patience of the reporters, etc.
By ten o'clock four graves, are opened, but owing to the non-arrival of some solder and zinc from Auckland it, is decided to open only two coffins on this occasion. The first of these contained the corpse of one Kong Shang, who died in 1891, a young Celestial of 36. It was thought that there would be nothing but dry bones there, but the stiff white clay is evidently a preservative, for when the coffin, which is full of water, is opened, it is seen that the bones have a decided covering of what had once been flesh and though drenched in carbolic acid a sickening odour makes itself felt at intervals. Directly an attempt is made to stir the body it all falls to pieces, the decomposed flesh falling off in almost imperceptible flakes, which had doubtless been dust had the grave been dry. Very carefully the impassive Chinaman in the grave rinses and unconcernedly places on a sieve a thigh bone, then some ribs, and a skull, followed by the rest of the bones, minute search, indescribable in print, being made for the smaller bones and joints. It is an intensely gruesome spectacle, and the horror is added to by the indifference to sight and smell or sentiment evinced by the Celestial workmen. The venerable clerk, a fine old fellow, with the face of an ascetic and a student, carefully tallies the bones which, having been rescoured in a large white tub, are finally dried and wrapped up, each duly docketed by the methodical old gentleman, who is evidently a most conscientious and probably deeply religious man. He, too, is fastidiously clean, and does not, one notes, eat as the others do in the midst of their noisome labours. The next body is that of a man who must have been of exceptional stature and weight for a Chinaman, and who has been dead but two years and a-half. There is much difficulty in getting this coffin to the surface, and the opening thereof, and the awful stench which completely dominated all disinfectants when the body was removed to the zinc one prepared by the European tinsmith beggars description, and may be left to the imagination. None of those whose duty called them to be present are likely to forget the experience, or to desire a renewal of the same. The soldering having been completed, it must be admitted no effluvia was discernable. The zinc coffin was then put in a rude case and packed in sawdust ready for shipment. There is no reason to think the zinc coffins will not prove effective and inoffensive under ordinary ciroumstances, and careful usage, but a fall or any accident in loading would, one imagines, have very disastrous effects. The work ceased at noon to-day. Mr Winstanley, Government Sanitary Inspector, is present, and looks after his work in so thorough a manner that no fears need be entertained by settlers or the general public. The pictures secured by the "Graphic" protographer are of a unique nature and the most gruesome details having been omitted, are quite without offence. They will be published on Wednesday.
The custom of the Chinese at home is to disinter bodies after seven years, and place the main bones in a large jar alongside the grave. It is in order to forward the bones to China for relatives to do this that the present exporting of remains is undertaken.
paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19020929.2.45
THE CHINESE CORPSES
The disinterment of the bodies of the Chinese from cemeteries throughout the colony during last, and the early part of the present month excited a good deal of interest. In Greymouth nearly 200 bodies were "resurrected" and stored in a shed in the cemetery, much to the disgust of the residents, who unsuccessfully protested against the bodies being allowed to remain above ground until the arrival of the Ventnor. The expenses of the removal of the dead Chinese to their native land, where alone their spirits could find perfect peace, was borne by their friends, the undertaking being so costly that, only the wealthier relatives could afford the expenditure, many hundreds of unhappy Celestials being obliged "to lie in cold corruption and to rot" in the cemeteries of the "foreign devil."
The exhumation of all the bodies was carried out by the one party of "resurrectionists," Chinese with a half-caste leader and a European plumber. The Chinamen carried out their gruesome work with the utmost indifference, knocking off to eat their meals immediately after handling the bodies without a thought of nauseation.
Some bodies had been interred about twenty years ago, others within the last year. In the case of those which had been reduced to skeletons the bones were carefully sorted, and packed in boxes ready for shipment. In other cases the flesh had reached an advanced stage of putrefaction, and in these the bones were stripped and similarly, treated to the skeletons of older bodies. When the bodies were still whole they were packed in air-tight coffins, soldered down, and labelled with the name of the departed.
In all eleven corpses were taken from their graves at Waikumete. These were not shipped on the Ventnor at Auckland, but were taken down the coast in smaller vessels to Wellington, and there transhipped to the Ventnor.
The Chinese in Auckland were excited on the receipt of the news of the foundering, but when questioned as to what, according to Confucianism, would become of the spirits of the sunken Celestials, they professed ignorance.
paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19021029.2.54.5
LOSS OF THE VENTNOR.
FOUNDERED NEAR HOKIANGA.
BOAT AND CREW MISSING.
HOKIANGA, October 29.
The steamer Ventnor, which left Wellington for Hongkong on Sunday, foundered off the Hokianga Bar last night at about a quarter to nine.
The Ventnor left Wellington, as stated, on Sunday, with 500 Chinese bodies and 6400 tons of coal. She was owned by Gow, Harrison and Co., of Glasgow, her port of register, and was captained by H. G. Ferry. Before she had been long out, at forty minutes after midnight on Sunday, a shock which shook the vessel from stem to stern made manifest to everyone aboard that the steamer had struck a rock, a subsequent investigation showing that the reef hit was to the southward of Cape Egmont.
The engines were at once reversed, and in a short time the vessel managed to get off. The wells were then sounded, and it was found that the vessel was making water in No. 1 hold.
The vessel was headed off shore to a safe distance, and then proceeded up the coast.
Meanwhile, the steam pumps were got to work, but from the first it was found that they were unequal to the task of coping with the inflow, and gradually the water gained, rising higher and higher in the hold.
On Tuesday morning it was found that the ballast tanks in the peak were full, putting the steamer down by the head, and making it evident that she had but a short time to float.
In the evening her bow was so far under water that she became unmanageable, and it was seen that she was gradually sinking, despite every effort that could be made.
At about 9 p.m. it became evident that the vessel was going down fast, and all hands were ordered to the boats.
These were launched by their respective crews, who immediately pulled away from the sides of the doomed vessel.
Hardly had they reached a safe distance when the vessel's stern rose in the air, and she sank, bow first.
The Hokianga Heads light was seen at a distance of about ten miles, and the boats pulled in the direction of the light.
At daylight this morning two boats arrived on the Omapere Beach, bearing fourteen of the crew, including the chief mate, John Cameron, the second and third engineers, D. Bailee and K. Muir, and two cooks, and a messman.
Mr Martin, harbourmaster, has taken the small steamer Energy out off Whangape to pick up two more boats which were sighted from the pilot station. One of these was picked up at 10 o'clock, but the other had not been reached at the time of wiring, 10.30 a.m.
Besides her crew of 31 persons, including five Chinese, the Ventnor had six Chinamen as passengers. Of the coffins 489 were insured in the Alliance Company for £5490. The fungus was insured for about £320 in various offices. She was under the charge of Captain H. Ferry, who has been seventeen years in the employment of the same company. The steamer was under charter to W. Scott Fell and Co., of Sydney, contractors. Messrs John Mill and Co., of Dunedin and Wellington, were the colonial agents.
Of the coffins 489 were shipped by the Chong Shin Tong Society, which is a branch of the big society in China called the Tai Chuen. The other ten coffins were shipped by Yei Chong, of Manners-street, and did not belong to any society.
The Ventnor's crew numbered thirty-one, and those on board included nine Chinese body attendants. These attendants of the dead are old and decrepit Chinamen, who are being sent home to China by the Chong Shin Tong, and given sufficient money to keep them from work for the remainder of their lives.
paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19021030.2.87
SS Ventnor with details of final voyage:
Needed a central location for something like this. We're always talking about our Wants and Needs - but without seeing those goals daily we're careless with money. Here they are right in front of us all the time.
Daily Docket for me to refer to has always been hidden. Now tomorrow's is up on the fridge so family can add to it when they need something done too.
Around the side of the fridge is my cleaning list & homemade cleaner instructions. On the opposite wall is our family calendar & corkboard.
Now I just need to fancy up those magnets.
And um...who am I?
(P.S. That green "pen" is actually a mechanical pencil...me loves it.)
We had a busy day of yardfun and cooking and quilt-cutting on the docket, but when we woke up this morning we discovered a riot of peach blossoms on the branch in the kitchen, conveniently staged in a glorious sunbeam. Everything was put on hold for a few minutes so we could furiously document it.
MTW Missionary Paul Alexander tries to figure out the docket for Presbytery (written completely in Russian.) At 74 years of age, Pastor Alexander has been dogged in his pursuit of learning the Russian language, and he is rapidly gaining in his abilities -- an inspiration to all of us!
We had a busy day of yardfun and cooking and quilt-cutting on the docket, but when we woke up this morning we discovered a riot of peach blossoms on the branch in the kitchen, conveniently staged in a glorious sunbeam. Everything was put on hold for a few minutes so we could furiously document it.
We had a busy day of yardfun and cooking and quilt-cutting on the docket, but when we woke up this morning we discovered a riot of peach blossoms on the branch in the kitchen, conveniently staged in a glorious sunbeam. Everything was put on hold for a few minutes so we could furiously document it.
DocketCall scrubs the juvenile's name, identifying them only by case number, to protect their privacy.
A Civil War reenactment at the Delaware County Historical Association (New York) on July 19, 2015.
This was one heck of a hot summer day. The Battle of Little Round Top was on the docket for that day.