Gay or Aboriginal quotas not practical: Ride-event pieces such as brakes and splash-downs to make your rides more realistic. These measures cannot depend upon the territories power in section of the Constitution for their validity. All styles come in both open and closed positions. Indeed, the prisoner seems to have been treated with some consideration during those sixteen weeks afloat. The SSDRC is published, edited, and maintained by Tim Moore, a former disability claims examiner for the social security administration's disability determination services DDS , as well as a former caseworker with a background in many federal assistance programs, including medicaid for disabled adults.
Tell the Forest Service today: Yellowstone is More Valuable than Gold.
From ABC turmoil to a shrinking budget deficit 2: Kindness should be central to decision making: Labor calls for banking royal commission extension 0: Labor calls for extension of banking royal commission 0: Labor to push for Senate Inquiry after Milne resignation 2: ABC Board reportedly asks its Chairman to reconsider his future 4: Assistant Treasurer confuses debt and deficit 6: The Assistant Treasurer can't differentiate debt and deficit: Clock ticking for Wentworth by-election hopefuls 0: Gay or Aboriginal quotas not practical: Tony Abbott urges Indigenous students to take control of their destiny 6: ABC is in 'grave danger' of being an echo chamber for trendy leftie views: Australians should hold a referendum on Australia Day: Greens ramp up calls for a state-owned power retailer 0: Broncos train ahead of NRLW final 0: Sky Racing Update Sep 27 4: Sky Racing News Update - Highlights from the Red Carpet 0: Conor and Khabib's explosive press conference 1: Flagstaff Hill president's emotional speech after three-peat 1: Sky Racing Update - Sky Racing news update 4: Sky Racing update 17sep 2: Advertiser AFL finals week 2 preview 6: Sky Racing news update 11 Sep 3: Sky Racing news 3: TAB market update 1: The giants of GPS rugby 0: Kelly Slater's landlocked surf break 0: Jordan Mailata's incredible NFL journey Thurston's final training session for the Cowboys 0: Advertiser Round 23 AFL review 6: First look at Blind Date 0: Danielle Bregoli Shades Nicki Minaj!
What you need to know about your pre-nup 0: Tiny Electric Cars 0: The five fastest acting diseases you need to be aware of 0: Australian murder suspect shown on police bodycam video 1: How can we reduce our use? The Columnists on Risk 0: This estimate is supported by a letter of August 1, , from Arthur to Sir George Murray, in which, referring to Mrs. This lady, it appears, is most respectably connected in England, and, allured by the gross misrepresentations of her Husband as to the comfort of his situation in this Colony, she, unfortunately, ventured to join him.
Wounded by the shameful duplicity which had been practised upon her, some domestic misunderstanding took place immediately after her debarkation It is all of a piece. Acutely disappointed at his treatment, Savery took every opportunity of inflating his importance in the eyes of the colonists, whether bond or free. We may recall, for instance, in an earlier passage, Emmett's comments on Savery's motives and methods in getting his certificate a few weeks after he arrived in Tasmania.
The deception had results that were almost fatal. The Henry Wellesley reached Hobart on October 30 or 31, What quarrels or misunderstandings took place between Mrs. Savery and her husband can only be conjectured, but these must have been poignant.
A week after her arrival, on the evening of Friday, November 7, Savery attempted suicide by cutting his throat. Luckily for him, help was at hand: William Crowther was summoned, and Savery's life was preserved. His recovery was not the end of his troubles. The writ that was pending now seemed likely to involve his wife, who had brought out some property with her. She appealed to Algernon Montagu, who agreed to meet the demand provided that nothing was done that would prove distressing to Mrs.
But the creditors nevertheless initiated action that threatened her possessions, and Henry Jennings requested Montagu to fulfil his verbal assurances. Montagu—quite reasonably, one feels—declared himself under the circumstances no longer bound by his former promise. The further development of this affair, which resolved itself into a series of bitter quarrels between Jennings and Montagu—intemperate letters, an abortive libel action, publication of correspondence in the newspapers, appeals to Arthur, and so forth—hardly concerns us.
But the writ against Savery brought about his imprisonment on December Savery was now in a sorry plight—her husband in prison for debt with no prospect of early release, herself dependent on monies from England for Montagu, even if willing, could hardly provide for her financially —and saw no solution in the Colony for her problems.
She was advised to return to England. Some time between February 10 and 15, , hardly more than three months after her arrival, she left with her son on the Sarah. Savery never saw her again. In September, , a few months after he received his ticket of leave, he filled in an application at the Colonial Secretary's Office to have her brought out on a free passage. She did not respond. Savery remained in prison until March, , a period of fifteen months.
He suffered no particular physical hardships during his imprisonment, but enforced leisure must have been irksome to a man so prone to activity of almost all kinds. He occupied the latter half of , we may gratefully note, in writing; for it was in those six months that he produced his most engaging work, The Hermit of Van Diemen's Land.
It consisted of a series of thirty sketches of Hobart life and characters, longer than Goldsmith's essays in The Citizen of the World, but with a general resemblance to them.
An advertisement of January 8, , in the Colonial Times announced the publication of these sketches in a volume, but a week later this was modified to say that publication was suspended until an impending libel suit based on the Hermit articles should be disposed of.
The suit was brought on May 10, —Gamaliel Butler v. Savery's name was not mentioned in the case, for the authorship of the Hermit articles was a well-preserved secret. Indeed today, but for Henry Melville, the Hobart printer and publisher, we should not know that Savery wrote them. This notation by Melville, as reproduced below, is the only evidence that we possess that names Savery. But there is no reason to doubt Melville's ascription. Henry Savery a merchant of Bristol was about the year transported for forgery and was a crown prisoner when in jail in In the same jail in Hobart Town was Thomas Wells incarcerated for common debt.
Savery wrote all the Hermit and Wells copied for the printer. At that time if the authorities knew that a prisoner wrote for the press the punishment was transportation to the penal establishment of Macquarie Harbour. Hence arose the mystery about the authorship of the Hermit! I believe all the parties mentioned except myself are in spirit land.
On obtaining his ticket of leave Savery became a great Agriculturalist and failed. He again committed forgery and was sent to the penal settlement of Port Arthur where he destroyed his life by cutting his own throat.
He was the author of Quintus Servinton of which he is the hero. The writing page is that of Andrew Bent from whom the undersigned bought the Colonial Times and printing establishment in An annotation by Arthur of March 16 runs:.
If Savory sic be discharged from Jail, I wish Him to be assigned to Major Macintosh, with the positive condition that He is to reside at his Farm in the neighbourhood of N. Norfolk—is not to be allowed to Trade or be employed on his own account in any way. The stipulation is ominous—an indication of Arthur's exasperation, which Savery, often unwittingly, had aroused, and also of his distrust. It must have been in the later months of his imprisonment and during his retirement, as we may put it, with Macintosh that he wrote Quintus Servinton, of which this volume is a reprint.
Advertisements appeared in January, , in the Hobart Town Courier and in the Tasmanian to say that the novel was in the press and would shortly be published in three volumes octavo; and that as it was printed expressly for transmission to England, only a few copies would be reserved for sale in the Colony.
The first of these papers reviewed it on March We have read the new novel, Quintus Servinton, and though it cannot certainly claim the first rank among the many eminent works of a similar kind of the present day, it is very far from being discreditable to us as a first production of the kind in these remote regions The story is written in an easy and in some parts elegant and affecting style, and with those who know and can identify the hero, will be read with considerable interest This comment reads a little odd to us today: What this was is uncertain, but he possibly contributed the historical section or, more probably, wrote or revised the gardening notes.
In January, , he submitted a petition for some relaxation of severity, and this he accompanied with over seventy testimonials from all kinds of people. These comments fall into two groups—those that briefly and formally recommend Savery, and those of greater length that make mention of Savery's character and actions, and of the acquaintance of the writers with Savery's family in England.
One from James Grant refers to Quintus Servinton: I think I know more of his principles from his writings than any other source, and will here quote the observation I made audibly on closing the book after reading thro'—"If Mr. Savery wrote this Book he cannot be a bad man, and I think he had atoned for his offence against Public Justice.
The Colonial Secretary replied favourably on May 31, and on June 5, between six and seven years after his arrival in Tasmania, Savery received his ticket of leave. A year later he was deprived of it in a manner that may seem to us rather arbitrary. James Gordon, a police magistrate in the Richmond area, was suspended for "non-payment of fees and fines He protested against his suspension, received no redress, and published the correspondence in a pamphlet.
This was reviewed in the Tasmanian of March 1, , and certain comments were made on Gordon's motives and behaviour, among them this:. Gordon of any dishonesty in the business, his own letters convict him of a disreputable bias towards "filthy lucre.
At the time this review appeared, Henry Melville, the printer of the Tasmanian, was absent. Savery, who had for some time been his assistant, was looking after the paper. This gave Gordon his opportunity. Bitterly resentful of Arthur and the authorities, he decided to use against them Order no. The Order, once used by Arthur in his campaign against Andrew Bent, was now to be used against Arthur himself. Gellibrand, Gordon's lawyer, was instructed to bring out the fact that the authorities now winked at the breaking of this Order.
Gordon laid a complaint against Savery, who was charged at the Police Office on May 30 that, being a convict holding a ticket of leave, he had inserted in the Tasmanian an article tending to traduce the character of Gordon—all being contrary to the Order mentioned. The three magistrates, M. Forster, Josiah Spode and James England, ordered Savery to be deprived of his ticket of leave for twelve months.
The whole affair was a tissue of cross-purposes and miscalculations. The unfortunate Savery had not written the review. It was the product of one Thomas Richards, who had come out, a free man, not very long before. Richards wrote to admit his authorship, and absolved Savery of blame. But Savery, as it happened, had not been penalized for editing a newspaper or for writing the review.
Both Forster and Spode, in letters to Arthur, declared that Savery was punished not because he had violated Order no. The Executive Council, reporting on the affair about a week later, stressed that this had not come out at the trial, that Savery had known nothing of it, and therefore had no reason to offer evidence in rebuttal.
Consequently he ought to have his ticket of leave restored. We know that it was restored, but it apparently took a little time. The worst sufferer was Gordon himself.
By carelessness or in treachery by Gellibrand there was left in the Police Office the brief that contained Gordon's instructions to his lawyer, Gellibrand. This made clear, in Forster's words, that Gordon had brought suit "in order to establish a false accusation made against the government of its sanctioning convicts having the control of the Newspaper press.
Aiming at Arthur, Gordon had temporarily crippled Savery and had severely wounded himself. There were no punches pulled in political squabbles in early Tasmania. From this time until , the year when the last phase of Savery's troubled career began, references and records are sporadic. It is interesting to note the considerable legal activity of which he had, directly or indirectly, already been the cause: Bent libel action, the Gordon v. One might think that Savery would have had his fill of litigation.
But in the next five years on occasion actions were not only brought against him but also initiated by him. William Lindsay, William Gibbins, and Maurice Smith were three of those with whom he had legal brushes.
All this time he continued his work in agriculture, and leased farms that he proceeded to develop. There survive, for instance, two letters in which he offers his advice to Arthur on the improvement of soil. Writing from The Lawn Farm in the New Norfolk district on November 24, , he points out that Arthur's farm, directly opposite, is covered with water weeds.
He suggests that his own methods, quite different from those normally employed, may serve. Arthur either wrote asking further advice or else granted him an interview, for in a second letter dated December 4, , Savery says he has inspected Arthur's property and thinks the solution may be numerous deep drains dividing up the fields into small plots together with lime dressing on some fields. He concludes by insisting that his only motive for thus intruding upon Arthur's attention is his own interest in agriculture, a profession which he feels has been neglected.
Savery's final troubles began in , when in February Thomas Young, attorney for Reuben Joseph, petitioned that Savery be declared insolvent.
The proceedings, repeatedly postponed month after month, must have weighed on Savery's mind, and it seems likely that in these last years he took to drink. From a report of a meeting of creditors after his death, for instance, there emerges news of a debt to William Montgomerie, licensed victualler. Though this may have been incurred for other needs than liquor, it appears significant enough.
Despite all this, there were a few bright patches. In March of the same year he received his conditional pardon. His interest in agriculture, marked throughout his years in the Colony, had its last manifestations. In May he took over a farm at Hestercombe from one Dunn, under an agreement that Savery was to be, as it were, on probation for a year. But any hopes he had of rehabilitating himself were delusive, for this very project, so it seems, was among the causes of his ultimate fall.
He sank deeper and deeper into debt, signed bills with little hope of meeting them, renewed them, and paid them by bills drawn on others. As if this were not enough, minor worries tormented him.
Early in he had some trouble over a pass he had given his assigned servant, granting him permission to leave the farm and stay away overnight. Perhaps because of this, added to doubts of his suitability, near the end of the same year the Board of Assignment refused him an assigned servant in spite of his plea that it was essential for him to have one.
The burden grew heavier. Savery apparently became neglectful even of correspondence. The Hobart Town Gazette, for instance, listed him as one of those for whom unclaimed letters were being held at the General Post Office for the quarters ending March and June of At last the wretched man cracked. In desperation, we must suppose, he resorted to the device that had been the original cause of his downfall—he signed fictitious bills.
During the week, forged bills to a considerable extent have been detected. The offender is the well known Mr. Report states that he has fled via Launceston, and shipped himself for Adelaide. On Tuesday, September 29, he was arrested in Hobart Town, was examined at the Police Office two days later, and was remanded.
On October 29 he was brought up for trial before the same Algernon Montagu who had acted as the protector of Mrs. Savery on her voyage out to Tasmania.
The witnesses were Richard Cooke and Josiah Austin, and there was a jury of seven. Savery pleaded not guilty to the charge of uttering a forged acceptance with intent to defraud Richard Cooke. The jury brought in the expected verdict of guilty, and Montagu addressed the prisoner in terms of severe condemnation: Transportation beyond the sea for life.
This generally meant, for Tasmanian offenders, imprisonment in the penitentiary at Port Arthur, the grim group of buildings on Tasman's Peninsula, controlled at that time by Captain Charles O'Hara Booth, an administrator capable, forceful, just, and inflexible.
Thither Savery was transported. His death, unlike his birth, still presents a puzzle. The note by Henry Melville in the British Museum copy of The Hermit in Van Diemen's Land, reproduced in this volume, contains the laconic statement that Savery "was sent to the penal settlement of Port Arthur where he destroyed his life by cutting his own throat.
On Sunday, January 9, he saw Savery. Here are the relevant parts of Burn's story:. From the cells we went to the hospital, where we had a signal opportunity of drawing a wholesome moral from the sad—the miserable consequences of crime. There, upon a stretcher, lay Henry Savary sic , the once celebrated Bristol sugar-baker—a man upon whose birth Fortune smiled propitious, whose family and kindred moved in the very first circles, and who himself occupied no inconsiderable place in his fellow-citizens' esteem.
Burn goes on to give an outline sketch of Savery's trial and his life in Van Diemen's Land, where eventually he was There he experienced a shock of paralysis, and there ere long, in all human probability, the misguided man will terminate his wretched career.
It has been said by the slanderers of the Colony that vice makes converts. I would that my ancient antagonist, His Grace of Dublin, or even his ally of the Colonial Gazette, could have stood, as I did, by Savary's pallet—could have witnessed the scarce-healed wound of his attenuated throat—the lack-lustre glare of his hollow eye: I think even they would have felt inclined to doubt the syren's blandishments.
Knowing, as I once did at Bristol, some of Savary's wealthy, dashing, gay associates, I could not contemplate the miserable felon before me without sentiments of the deepest compassion mingled with horror and awe.
There he lay, a sad—a solemn warning. All this occurred only a month before Savery's death on February 6, He was buried two days later by the Wesleyan minister at Port Arthur, the Rev. John Allen Manton, whose notebook has the entry:. Today I have committed to the grave the remains of Henry Savery, a son of one of the first bankers in Bristol, but his end was without honour.
There are a few questions one would like answered. Was Savery still suffering the "shock of paralysis" when Burn saw him, and if so, did he recover from it and cut his throat? Again, what does Burn mean by "the scarce-healed wound of his attenuated throat"? Does he mean "lately-healed" or "badly-healed"? If the first, then Savery must have attempted suicide at Port Arthur; if the second, then Burn probably refers to the scar left by the attempt in There remains the assertion by Henry Melville that Savery died by cutting his throat.
But it should be remembered that in Melville was writing twenty-seven years after Savery's death. On the other hand Melville was usually accurate.
Crowther of Hobart has pointed out to me that suicide attempts are often repetitive. Savery made two early attempts—by drowning, by cutting his throat. A third attempt was likely enough. We are left then with three possibilities: I incline to the first explanation, and think that a lapse of Melville's memory he was sixty-nine when he wrote the note on Savery transferred the suicide attempt of to the Port Arthur period.
But this is speculation, and it seems unlikely that we shall ever know for certain. The events of Savery's life and the autobiographical novel he has left us give some insight into the man. He was, so far as can be learned, not striking in appearance. All we gain from the prison record is that he was five feet eight inches in height, and that he had brown hair and hazel eyes. But he was not commonplace in temperament. His fraud discovered by chance, his escape frustrated by half-an-hour, his condemnation caused by a misunderstanding, his life preserved within twenty-four hours of execution, his wife saved from shipwreck only to wreck his marriage, lawsuits brought against him because of accidents of time and place, mishaps in business, bad luck or bad management in farming, and finally debt and forgery and his last condemnation—it all presents a multicoloured picture.
Henry Savery was, we may think, accident-prone. On the other hand he was not a mere pawn without control over his movements. His own estimates of his character, found at various points in the novel, seem fairly penetrating and objective, and they differ in this respect from his accounts of the events that happened. In such recountals he tidies up the truth, he prunes a trifle, adds a little here and there, and the result is not quite the actuality itself.
He presents himself as more innocent than he was. And yet his self-portrayal, when in the form of an estimate, is very near the truth. He had to be doing things, and he liked to be recognized as responsible for these. This brashness never left him. He was subdued by his experiences as a convict in Tasmania, but up to the last few years before his final arrest he still sought recognition: He was, I think, often devious and secretive in his dealings—but hopeful of outcome and not unmindful of the claims of others.
He was also, I suspect, prone to assertiveness if not arrogance, and when he had power he used it—but he always felt sure that his enemy had attacked first or at any rate deserved what he got. He had the family pride of birth and he was proud in himself. He always overbid his hand, a practice which in his earlier years was forgiven for a time until the impersonal forces of law weighed acts and not motives.
But experience did not teach him. After a time he was deceiving himself more than others. Lieutenant-Governor Arthur, perhaps in exasperation at the trouble that Savery had unwittingly caused him, wrote to Goderich on December 27, And yet he must have possessed considerable charm. He had, as David Burn put it, a circle of "dashing, gay associates" in Bristol; he could, it is reasonable to deduce from the evidence, persuade his father to forgive him a great deal; he was loved sincerely by his wife, who despite one shipwreck was willing to risk another and come out to Tasmania to join him; and he was able to extract glowing testimonials from friends and acquaintances even after conviction and further lawsuits.
It is not too harsh to suggest that apart from successful ingenuity and a practised bravado he had many of the qualifications of the confidence-man. The picture Savery gives in Quintus Servinton is then mostly true in analysis of what he was, less true in description and narration of what he did. There is not, we may be thankful, much tearful contrition or whining exculpation. It is a good human document. As a work of literature, though it is not likely to occupy any high position, it has its claims on our attention.
It is for instance the first Australian novel—the first story dealing in any measure with Australia written by an inhabitant. There are one or two earlier stories, for instance Alfred Dudley; or, the Australian Settlers by an unknown author in England, who claims to have drawn his information from "the kind communications of a gentleman who resided for some time in Australia," but these can hardly be called Australian novels.
As for Mary Grimstone's Woman's Love, a romantic tale set in England, it was, as Morris Miller points out, mostly written in Hobart during her three years there March to February , was revised in England , and published in , a year after Savery's novel appeared. Quintus Servinton holds its position by setting, date of publication, and residence of the author. It is also valuable and interesting for its picture of convict life as experienced by the educated convict, and here it affords a contrast and a complement to such a narrative as Ralph Rashleigh, in which James Tucker paints a sombre picture of the brutality that can crush the convict of humble birth and little education who is put to manual tasks.
And last, simply as a novel, it still has power to tell a story. It has its obvious defects: It is interesting to note that, though written about ninety years after Fielding's earliest novel, it is more formal in diction and seems today more old-fashioned. And yet, in spite of these handicaps, it can persuade a reader to turn the pages and want to know what is coming next. The pictures it gives of English provincial life and even the accounts of business dealings in England are—for some readers at any rate—fascinating in their details.
The narrative power is characteristic of a great deal of our fiction of last century; many greater novels of this century seem not to have it in the same degree. Let not the Readers of Quintus Servinton adopt an unfavorable impression towards it, because the author has thought fit to depart from a custom now-a-days in fashion, and to prefix to his publication a few introductory observations, calculated, he conceives, to act the Master of the Ceremonies, and to bring his pretensions before the world under more favourable auspices, than he might otherwise be justified in anticipating.
First, then, as to the tale itself. Although it appears under this shape,—or, as some may perhaps call it, novel,—it is no fiction, or the work of imagination, either in its characters or incidents. Not by this, however, is it pretended to be said that all the occurrences it details, happened precisely in their order of narration, nor that it is the mere recital of the events of a man's life—but it is a biography, true in its general features, and in its portraiture of individuals; and all the documents, letters and other papers contained in its pages are transcripts, or nearly so, of originals, copied from the manuscript, which came into the author's hands in the manner described in the introductory chapter.
Thus much for the subject of the Work. Now, for a few words of a more personal nature, as respects him by whom it is written. It was not wholly a desire of fame, nor the hope of profit, nor, he trusts, an over-weening vanity, that led the author to "o'erstep the modesty of nature," and venture to compose a book; but it was the idea that he might convey useful and instructive precepts under their most attractive guise—the force of example. Let him not be understood, however, as wishing to convey that he feels indifferent upon the point, either of honor or of a fair remuneration for his time; for, were he regardless of the first, he might be enticed into a careless laxity, quite irreconcilable with prudence on the part of one, who treads so dangerous and uncertain a path as that of Literature, when intended for the amusement of others; and so far as the second is concerned, there are few, similarly circumstanced to the Author—whose chief dependence is the allegiance due to his King and Country, who can afford to consider it altogether immaterial, whether they devote many long and wearisome hours to an employment, "free, gratis, and all for nothing," or, whether they reap some advantage from their labours.
Perhaps, therefore, each of the inducements has had some weight in the production of Quintus Servinton. What course therefore remained open?
Either to employ the many and tiresome hours of a passage from England to this distant Colony, in the completion of the work, and then to send the manuscript home for publication, subject to all the inconveniences that must have inevitably attended such a plan, and which are as well known to authors as the want of the last touch—the last finish, would be understood and lamented, by the professors of the various branches of the Arts and Sciences; or to defer till a return to Europe, the ushering into existence the fruit of his labours.
Most unexpectedly, however, the termination of the voyage removed one very great difficulty; for, by the extraordinary progress that has been made, in adapting this little speck upon the Southern Ocean, to the wants and necessities of Englishmen, it was found easily practicable to print and publish an octavo work, in Van Diemen's Land.
It may be hoped that the mere circumstance alone, of Quintus Servinton's being the first publication of this nature, that has ever issued from a Colonial Press, may induce a favourable reception of the undertaking, both here and in England; particularly, when it is borne in mind, that this Press exists in one of the most recently formed of the English Colonies. The Author has not to learn that he requires some such extraneous help, towards supplying the numerous demands upon the patience of the reader which, he fears, will be found to pervade his pages; and when he adds, that the style of composition is entirely new to him, he is aware how much further occasion he has to solicit indulgence for his temerity in entering an arena, where a mighty genius has latterly presided, chasing from the very precincts, all, whose pretensions do not exceed mediocrity.
Still, is he not dismayed; because, strip him even of all other laurels, he defies the hand that may be lifted against the moral tendency of his tale; and he has not now to learn the great influence this ever has, in creating favor with the British Public. Had time and occasion served, perhaps he could have made the work more perfect in its form, its style, and language; yet, the correctness of its details could not have been improved.
Such as it is, therefore, he entrusts it with some degree of confidence, to the countenance and support of the English Nation. Which of my readers chances to be acquainted with the beautiful scenery of the South of Devonshire? If there be any such, let his recollection be carried a little farther, and perhaps it may present to him a spot, nearly equidistant from the two towns, where, in the centre of a lawn, gently shelving towards the river, flanked on the rear by a luxuriantly wooded hill, on one side by a continuous tract of rich pastures, and on the other by a lane, conducting the traveller to the village of Appleford, stands a remarkably handsome cottage, immediately surrounded by a shrubbery, kept in the highest order, and communicating with the lane by a wicket, that opens upon a smooth, wide gravel road, leading to the front door, whence it again turns with a sweep, to the offices in the rear of the building.
The cottage itself is small, but singularly attractive in its appearance, from the tasty manner of laying out the grounds around it, evidently denoting that elegance and excellent management preside within its walls, under their fairest shape and form. Taiwan climbs to 5th in world baseball ranking. Typhoon periphery brings heavy rain to northern Taiwan. Most flights between Taiwan and Okinawa Friday canceled. Burning fantasy questions for Week 4. New Tom Petty set a form of therapy for his family and band.
Nominee's attack on Democrats poses risk to Supreme Court. Leaders at the UN, in their own words. Trump calls Ford testimony 'compelling;' backs Kavanaugh. A couple of them, in fact.