MILTON.

Bruce Herald, Volume x, Issue 956, 9 November 1877, Page 5

MILTON.

Tuesday, Nov 6. (Before Mr E. H. Carew, R.M.) FOLTCE V. ADAMS. The defendant, Thomas Adams, of "Waihola, was charged with having two hares in his possession during the prohibited time. Mr .Reid, for defendant, pleaded guilty, and explained that the hares were shot by defendant in his guvlen, as the}' had been doing gr»*at damage to his fruit trees, and showed that hares were so great a nuisance in the district that representations had been made to the Government. It appeared that the hares, when seized by the police in a railway carriage, were being taken to the Rev Mr Allan, of Stirling. His Worship said the plea of the hares being an intolerable nuisance would have been a much better excuse if no use had been made of the hares. As this was the first offence he would not; inflict so heavy a penalty as in any future case of the kind. It was notorious that a great deal ofgame was being destroyed, and in anj' other case he would inflict a iqucb, heavier fine, In this case be would inflict a small penalty, but still a substantial one. Defendant was fined 40s. His Worship was very explicit in stating that under the Act the Magistrate has power to. award half the fine to any informant, In this case the informants were the police themselves, and no claim for half the fine was made. THB GLTCNOItE CASK. Wing Ching Wa sued Aqdre^ M'-Lar-en, of Milton, butcher, for unlawfully assaulting him by presenting a pistol at him and threatening to shoot him. This action arose from the attempt of tjgfanda'it to eject numerous Chinese from jv claim at Glenare, situate on hind tillegcd to be owned by him. Mr Copland for complainant; Mr Rejd for defendant, who pleaded not guilty. — Mr Copland stated at length the facts of the case, which have already been given fully in the Bruce Herald, and submitted that Mr M'Laren had no justification in bringing a multitude of men with him, and weapons of offeßce, to break the peace, From the evidence it appeared that with one exception the Chineae Were dreadfully scared. One of them aa}d that when he saw th.c pistol he thought about d.eqth, and it further appeared that one wag so horror-stricken-that according to a Ohjuese witness he tu.rn.ed yellow, took to his bed, and could not eat for a day. For the defendant it was sought to be shown that though he produced the pistol when the long handle shovels of the Chinese were in bjs yJchiUJi yet he did nqt paint the weapon at any Qbjnaman. Mr William Marshall, who happened to. pass when the row was gqing on, was of opinion, that very little would have -precipitated a conflict, more especially at the. hea.d race. Chinese witnesses w^re positive the |>is,to| w&s ppiated $ cqdi-

plainant, and one of tuem said that complain-

| ant got so frightened that he turned quite yellow. Mr Reid, though not thinking that | the conduct of the defendant was such as j :ould be countenanced, submitted that it was j perfectly legal. For defendant, it was shown that although weapons of offence li.ul been brought to the ground, yet defendant hud given strict instructions that they should not b«? used. Mr Reid raised the questions no title (property involved) and no jurisdiction (the remedy should not be for assault). An application by Mr Copland to have the pistol forfeited was not granted, bis Worship declining to make an order 1 . His Worship reserved judgment. During the hoaring of the case defendant attempted to obtain possession of the pistol while it was in custody of the Cour .— His Worship fined hint -20s and costs, and said . that had not defendant been a good deal harassed lately he would have dealt with him very severely .- EDWARDS V. DYER. This was a complicated case of no special public iuterest, and was determined by his Worship giving judgment for . plaint^ in the sum ot £4 14s od.