CHRISTCHURCH.

Press, Volume XXII, Issue 2629, 9 January 1874, Page 3

CHRISTCHURCH.

Thursday, January 8. (Before 0. C. Bowen, Esq., R.M, and R. Westenra, Esq., J.P.) ASSAULT. Joseph Cook was charged with having violently assaulted Isabella Hepburn on the Ist January, on the Riccarton road.

Mr,T. I. Joynt defended. Isabella Hepburn deposed—l am a married woman and live near the Plough Inn, on the Riccarton road. I recollect being in Christchurch on the night of the Ist January. 1 came in to meet my husband who had gone to the regatta. I went to town to meet my husband, and saw the defendant on the cab stand near the City Hotel. He asked mc if I wanted a cab, and I asked what he would charge.to drive, mc to the Plough Inn—l found I had missed my husband—he told mc he would drive mc home for 2s 6d. We left ; and when we got to the gardens, he stopped; and when I looked out, I found be was tying tbe horse's reins up. He then asked mc if I knew. him. -I said not, and he then said I soon would. , He came down off the cab, and when he got down I got out and ran away. I saw a gentleman on the road, and I,called out " Police,": and ran towards him;. ;The gentleman told mc his name and where be liyed, but I cannot remember it. When the gentleman came up the defendant turned his cab and went away. Mr Petherick came' out of his hotel when he heard mc, and I told him that I had been insulted by a cabman I had employed to drive mc home.

By Mr Joynt —It was not later than eleven o'clock at the time. My husband had gone home before mc. I was not many minutes in town. I was at my brothers-in-law before I went to the cab-stand. I was quite sober, and never took a glass of spirits in my life. The defendant did not speak to mc until he stopped his cab. He did not ask mc whether he should drive mc to the Plough. He asked mc if I knew him, and said I should soon know him. I then stepped out of the cab, and ran away. There were not many people about at the time. I saw other cabmen on the stand when I went there.; I told my husband all about it. It was I who laid the information, my husband was not with mc at the time. I laid the information on the 3rd January, and with my husband's consent.

James Petherick—l keep the Plough Inn on the Riccarton road. On the night of the Ist January I heard some violent screaming after I had closed the house, and I went out and found Mrs Hepburn who complained to mc of having been insulted by a cab driver whom she bad hired to drive her home. Mrs Hepburn was in a very excited and distressed state. She lives near mc, and is a most respectable woman so far as I have ever seen or heard. She was not intoxicated nor do I know that she is in the habit of taking drink. I tried to induce her to take a little brandy that night aa I believed she required it from the distressed state she was in, but she merely tasted the glass I handed her.

By Mr Joynt—lt was about 11.30. She said she had been insulted near the acclimatisation grounds, about a quarter of a mile from my place. There were not many people about. She complained of having been insulted and seemed very much frightened and alarmed. .

Mr Joynt said that as instructed, his statement would place this matter in a different aspect. He would call a witness who would say that Mrs Hepburn seemed to be under the influence of drink. Mrs Hepburn bad asked to be driven to the Plough Inn. On the road Cook remembered that it was past eleven o'clock, and the hotel would be closed. He spoke twice through the trap door of the cab, and getting no reply he got down as he imagined the woman had fallen asleep. He then spoke to her, when she jumped out of the cab as if Btartled out of her sleep, and ran away. Next day the defendant and her husband visited the stand, and asked for Cook. He then told one of the cabmen that Cook had insulted his wife the previous night, and he intended to lay an information. The cabman asked him not to do so, when he said that if Cook apologised and gave the wife a dress, it would be all right. There was some talk about money afterwards, and eventually Hepburn took £2 to settle the matter, and in the presence of a witness. All this was done without the knowledge or sanction of Cook. He would now call—

— M'Taggart, who deposed—l had a conversation on the day after the alleged assault with both the husband and wife. He asked mc if I knew Cook, and said that he had' got himself into a pretty mess. The wife then came over, and I drove them down to Cook's. I asked Cook if he had driven a woman to tbe Plough Inn the previous night, He said he had, and he thought that she was cranky. When we spoke in presence of Cook, she repeated what she said in Court to-day, and Cook denied having insulted her. We then returned to the City, and Hepburn spoke to mc about what I would give him not to lay the information. "Oh, "I said," if it's a present you want let mc know what it is, as it would get us all into disgrace, even if it were true." He said, " A dress or something of that sort." There was something said about money afterwards, and I told him I would give £2 not to say anything more about tbe matter. He said he would take it, and I handed him the money in the City Hotel, in the presence of a witness. He then asked mc to shout for him, which I did. By Inspector Pender—Mrs Hepburn said she did not care about a dress, and he said refused inlfa sort of a half-taking way. you had better take something. She only not a positive refusal. She knew about the £2 when I drove them home, and she did not say then that she would not lay the information. Before the husband received the money from mc he had only one drink. Afterwards he took two drinks of whisky, one after the other.

Mrs Hepburn recalled, stated that she did go down with her husband to Cook's the day afterwards. The last witness drove them down there, and Cook said he did not insult mc ; that I was excited at the time, and did not know what I was doing. The last witness then said, " For God's sake say nothing about it. as it will only get the whole of us into disgrace." He then offered mc the best rigout I could get in Christchurch if I would say nothing, but I positively refused to do so. When we got back to tbe stand they all went into the public-house, and wanted mc to go with them but I would not. I positively refused to accept any money, and do not know that my husband took £2 to settle

it. By Mr Joynt—l never heard my husband

say anything to McTaggart/ about* money.or a dress. My'husband is at work at Mr Ffrost's to-day. He would have told mc if he had received .any money.

George Wells called —1 remember M'Taggart calling mc into the City Hotel to see the complainant's husband take £2. She was then in the passage close by. Cook was nowhere near the stand at the time.

Cross-examined by Mr Pender—lt was in the little side parlor that the money was paid. Mrs Hepburn was close by the door at the time. I do not know from the way it was done that she did know anything about the money or not When I saw Cook afterwards I told bim it was settled. The husband did not appear to be under the influence of drink at the time.

Inspector Pender would like to have tbe presence of the husband before proceeding further with the case.

His Worship said that after the evidence which had been given, the evidence of Hepburn was necessary for the sake of all the parties. He would adjourn the case until next Saturday. BREACH OF CITY BYE-LAWS. The following persons were fined for permitting horses and cattle to wander in tbe public streets and roads :—J. B. Nisbett ("two summonses) 103; J. S. Buxton, 5s ; Thos Aldridge, 5s ;J. Milsom, 5s ; John Dolan (two summonses), 5s each case; Robert Kinigan, os ; Thomas Allan, os ; R. Sunderland, 10s ; John Lane, 5a : Patrick M'Figue (two summonses), 5s in each case ; John Corboy, os; Wm Gutterings, 5s ; Lorenzo Zouch, 58 ; Wm Steer, os ; David Pine, 5s ; J. Chambers, 10s ; James Carter, 5s ; Wm Buckeridge, os; Fred Luckie, ss; J. S. Buxton, 5s ; David Thow, 6s ; P. Taylor, ss; J. Hadfield, ss; George Wells, ss. For tethering horses in the public streets the following fines were inflicted : —A. McPherson, 10s ; J. Dermott, 10s ; Elizabeth Fearon, 10s ; Alfred Gulliford, Josh McFarlane, 10s ; James Boot, 10s; Greassin Black, 10a; James Sutcliffe, for tethering a cow in the street, was fined 10s ; Michael Connors, for driving a cow through the streets during prohibited hours on the 10th December, was fined 10s ; — Gulliford, for tethering a horse in the Windmill road, was fined 10s.

Eliza Davis, charged on summons with having lighted a fire in Manchester street, near the Borough Hotel, in a garden attached to her house, was fined 10s.

Walter Buckingham was charged with letting off some Chinese crackers on the 16th December in the public street.

The defendant said that as others were doing the same he did not think it was wrong to do so. He had not been in Christchurch on a previous anniversary. His Worship told him he was a very large child, and fined him 10s. BREACH OF POLICE ORDINANCE. Walter Hartnell was charged with having hurt and harassed a horse oi the 7th Dec. last. Mr Slater appeared for the defendant. R. Davis said he lived on the Ferry road on the 7th of last month, he saw the defendant riding a young horse and beating him in the mouth with a stick. It was a large stick, and he saw him strike it several times in the mouth. He struck it very hard.

By Mr Slater —This was on the Ferry road. He must have struck the horse about half a dozen times. I think the stick was a piece of dry willow. Inspector Pender said the other witness, Mr Cnmmins, had not been served with a subpoena, and he should like to have his evidence.

His Worship said he would hear the evidence for the defence.

Mr Slater called the following evidence :—

Louis Smith saw the defendant on that day mount the horse. It would not start, and he hit it four or five times on the side of the mouth, but not sufficiently hard to hurt the horse. The stick was a light dry stick.

By Inspector Pender—l saw defendant strike it several times, but not hard enough to hurt the horse. Though used to horses he (the witness) was not in the habit of hitting them on the side of the head.

Edward Reeves corroborated the evidence of the last witness, and said the stick was a piece of a shrub which the defendant had broken off.

His Worship thought the action of the defendant was occasioned more through iguorance than intentional illtreatment. He was surprised to think that men accustomed to horses did not know better than to believe that hitting a horse about the head would do any good. The case would be dismissed. BREACH OF PUBLIC HOUSE ORDINANCE. Henry Smith was charged with keeping his licensed.house, the Courtenay Arms, open on Sunday the 21st ult. * Mr T. I. Joynt defended. Constable Haddrell stated that on that morning, when riding past the house, he saw this hotel open at ten o'clock. He spoke to Mr Smith, who replied that he was supplying travellers. He told him it was not to that he referred to, but the circumstance of his house being open, which he would have to report. Two witnesses, Mr Bean and Mr Read, residing in Christchurch, stated that on the 21st of December they arrived at the Courtenay Arms and went inside for refreshments. The door was shut when they arrived and all the time they were there, with the exception of a moment or so when Mr Bean opened the door to take a glass of ginger beer to the boy who remained outside in the trap. The constable came up while he was opening the door. ' His Worship did not think there had been any intentional breach of the Ordinance and dismissed the case. ASSAULT. William Lanassney was charged with having assaulted Johanna Lanassney. The defendant did not appear when called. His Worship had heard that Mr Callender had been down about its withdrawal, but th« defendant had not answered the summons, and as no reason had been shown him why the case should be withdrawn, he would order that a warrant be issued for bis arrest. Wm Deane was charged with having assaulted John Cusack.on the 7th of December.

John Cusack, a boy of eleven years, stated that on Saturday he was going up the Caledonian road,'when defendant caught hold of him and asked him his name ; be told him what he was, when he struck him in the eye. He then whacked him several times While he was on the ground. He said that lie (the witness) had struck his girl ■when he wasn't there.

Mrs Cusack stated the boy had been out half an hour that day, and he returned screaming and covered all over with mud, and his eye bunged up. When she took the boy to Mr Deane afterwards, he told her why he had beaten the boy was because he had struck his girl.

In defence, Mr Deane said that Mrs Cusack's boys were in the habit of assaulting his girls when they were sent out on messages. The boys were very badly looked after, and were a portion of a gang of larrikins who congregated at St Albans.

His Worship asked the boy if he had ever assaulted any of Mr Deane's girls ?

Witness —'

'•' Not as I knows of."

Mrs Cusack stated that Mr Deane had no right to call her boys larrikins. She bad closely looked after them since their father's death, and they regularly attended the Catholic school.

Emily Deane, a little girl, stated that John Cusack had struck her one evening with a stick when she was, going on a message.

His Worship said he was constantly in tbe habit of hearing complaints about boys in that quarter, and that was why he wished to get at the bottom of this. However annoying it might be to tbe defendant to have his girls assaulted, still he had no right to strike tbe boy as he had done, as he had given him a black eye. He would be fined 10s for the assault. His Worship then called the boy and told him he hoped he would not annoy those little girls again. If be did he should be very angry with him. labceny. James White, on remand, appeared to answer the charge of having stolen a plough wheel, the property of G. Willis. Mr Joynt appeared to defend.

. Wnu White stated—l am a brother of the defendant. I know the plough and plough wheel produced. I have been woTkingwith it for some time past. The wheel •«. -v* a Page wheel. The name is on it. T!;<- wheel produced is my brother's wheel. 1 know it by a crack in one of the spokes. The crack was was in it when I saw it three years ago. The fittings produced are ."the ones my brother have had in his possession for three years.

Frank Scott—l live on the Selwyn. I know the defendant for ten or eleven years. About three years ago I exchanged tbe wheel and fittings for a pair of face pieces. I could swear to the fittings but not to the wheel which was an odd one. The skeatb had cut marks in the mounting. The mounting produced is the one I exchanged with White, There is the mark I know it by.

By Inspector Pender—The wheel seems to be cast, but the mountingis hammer marked.

— Drayton—l am a wheelwright. I know Page ploughs and Ball ploughs. The wheel produced does not belong to a Ball plough, and the axle belongs either to a Page's or Ransome and Sims' plough. The wheel produced is not heavy enough for a Ball's plough, and is not the same pattern as a Ball's plough.

His Worship said there was no identification and the case would be dismissed.

Augustus Yelverton, who had been remanded for stealing linen shirts, the property of the Rev C. Fraser, was again brought up. Inspector Pender said the remainder of the missing property had not been recovered yet, and there was no further evidence.

The evidenc* taken on the former occasion was read over. The defendant said the man Brown had given him the shirts to sell. He (the accused) was an unfortunate drunkard but not a thief. He was sentenced to three months' imprisonment with hard labor. DRUNK AND CREATING A DISTURBANCE. John Jones Williams, for being drunk and creating a disturbance the previous evening at the Music Hall, was fined 10s. LUNACY FROM DRINK. Alexander McCausland had been brought down from the Kowai Pass suffering intensely from the effects of drink. As the unfortunate man was being helped into the Court he fell into a severe fit and was remanded to Lyttelton by his Worship for medical treatment. CIVIL CASES. H. J. Waters v A. Lilley, claim £2 0s 2d. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs 10s. W. v. George White, claim £15. Judgment for £5 damages and costs 635.