ASHBURTON.

Press, Volume XLV, Issue 7214, 27 November 1888, Page 6

ASHBURTON.

Monday, November 26. [Before Mr H. Friedlander, J.P., and Mr D. "Williamson, J.P.] Drunkenness and Vagranct.—Frank Gribbin was brought up on a charge of drunkenness, and fined 20a or three days imprisonment. Accused was also charged with being a rogue and vagabond, and sentenced to three months* imprisonment. A first offender was fined 10s and costs for drunkenness. Alleged Threatening Language.— Charles Physick was charged with having used threatening language towards E. W. Clark. Mr Guthoertson appeared for complainant, Mr Purnell for defendant. The evidence for the prosecution was that Physick had gone about four o'clock in the afternoon to Mr Russell's store, where complainant had an office, and asked for Clark, wfio came out on hearing his name mentioned. Physick then used very threatening and disgusting language, and said that he would rip Clark open, at the same time producing a long knife from under his coat. Physick was at the store again a little later on. In cross-ex-amination by Mr Purnell, Clark denied being on intimate, terms with Physick's wife, or ever having sent her a letter or any present. John Russell gaye evidence of Physick having.come to his shop and asked for Clark. On Clark appearing Physick used ■ violent and abusive language, and produced a broken bayonet with which he" threatened to rip open Clark. Witness denied e7er having offered Physick £10 to give evidence on his behalf at a case that is set down for hearing at the next sitting of the Supreme Court in Timaru. Charles Physick, the defendant, stated that he saw Russell standing outside his shop in the evening. He spoke to Russell, but did not see Clark at all or even meution his name. He had no weapon with him, neither did he use any threatening "language whatever towards Clark. He had reason to believe that Clark was intimate with his wife, and had sent her'presents.- Witness was to be a witness in the Supreme Court case, and Russell had offered witness £10 to give evidence on his (Russell's) behalf. Russell had threatened to prevent Physick giving evidence in the Supreme Court. Witness had never threatened Clark, but Russell had advised him (witness) to go for Clark. Sarah Ann Randall gave evidence as 6o seeing Physick and Russell outside the shop. Witness heard Physick speak to Russe'l, and in reply the latter threatened to put Physick "away." Physiok used no threatening language, neither did he produce any knife or other weapon. The Bench remarked that the case was a very painful one, and it was matter for much regret that the name of a married woman had had to be mentioned in the evidence. The evidence was all in favor, of defendant, and the case would be dismissed, with costs against complainant. Cos'XDBiAL UnbTappiness. — Charles Physick was • charged with having assaulted iiis wife,' Norah Physick. Mr Crisp appeared for complainant, Mr Purnell for ' Complainant gave \ evidence to the effect that she was living 1 apart from her husband. The arrangement was by mutual consent, the husband taking charge of two children and witness one. Physick was to allow her 10s per week, th'e use of some furniture and a cow, but instead of doing this ho was constantly annoying her, and had gone to her cottage and threatened to brain her with a tomahawk. He had also threatened to shoot her. Physick, in his defence, gave an opposite version of the tomahawking business, and said that his wife had threatened to brain him. She had thrust him out of her cottage, and at the same time had wounded him on the wrist with the tomahawk. She hud also threatened to scald him with a kettle of water, but when she. made for the kettle he bolted out of the-house: Physick was bound over, himself in £20, to. keep the peace for twelve months. He was also ordered to pay Court costs.