DRURY. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, (FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.) September 19.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XX, Issue 2238, 22 September 1864, Page 4

DRURY. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, (FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.) September 19.

■ The following cases wore this day heard in tho > 'Resident Magistrate's Court, before Charles [ Mellsop, Esq. :—: — GEORGE WIIITTINGTON Y. CHARLES HAVEN. : This was an information and Bummonsfor an ■ assault, and using abusive and threatening language. r There being no appearance ol the prosecutor, the . case was dismissed. ROBERT CAMERON Y. PATRICK I.A.VERT. 1 In this case, being tvn information heard under 5 the Summaiy Jurisdiction Act, against defendant, a « soldier m the 50th Regiment, who was charged I with stealing a pair of boots from Mr. Simpson's store, the following evidence was given :—: — Robert Cameion, being sworn, stated j I am » storekeeper for Mr. Simpson, at the Queen's Re- ; 1 doubt. On Sunday, the 4th Septembor, the prisoner, Patrick Laveiy, in company with two other private soldiers of the 50th Regiment, named Thomas 7 Keishaw and William Barratt, came to Mr. Simp- ' f son's store, of which I was then in care. I had pre1 viously known the prisoner by Bight. The parties r asked for a pot of beer which they paid ior and got. r Theie is a canteen in the stoic. I turned round to ' diaw the beer, when I heard some noise which * aroused my suspicion, as the store had been prfr. 1 viously robbed. The boots now produced, which r are the piopertyof Mr. Simpson, and which I value s at 20s , had mmy absence been taken off the beam t wheie thoy weie hanging, and weie put outside the door by the piisoner, orons of his companions. I l- saw the piisoner take up the boots, place them a under his aim, and walkaway with them. It was t then clear daylight I then walked out round the t counter, and went after the prisoner and asked him y where lie was taking the boots. His companion 3 had previously left the store. I took the roots from him, and he allowed me to do so. I had no way of r detaining him, but I called Kershaw's attention in d pusouer's presence to the fact of my finding the , boots on the prisoner. Kershaw took no notice, and . I then lepoited the circumstance to Colour-sergeant ' Brady, of Ihe 50th, who got a coiporal and two men, SandS and took him into custody. I charged the prisoner, ir befoie Colonel ITawky, of the 50th, with this te lobbery, which he denied being guilty of., When 'E the prisonei and his companions first came into the stoic, the Loots were hanging on the beam inside the store. 'lhey weie removed from thence and t' put outside of the door, as I believe by one of the d three men. Theio was no otlier peison in the s at the time. . *<""o Cross-examined by piisoner: The selling price of the :e boots in the store is 275. I did not follow you up ,t and have you arrested at the time, because you were not going m the direction of the redoubt. You were going alongside the canteen, in ,tha direction of tha s- Gieafc South Road. Thomas Kershaw and William Barratt were next examined on behalf of the prosecution, but as might c ! have been surmised, nothing very material was ell- :" cited f i om them. Colour sergeant Robert Brady, being sworn, deat posed • lam a colour-sergeant in the 50th Regiment, , and I know the prisoner. On the 4th September, it was reported to me by Mr. Cameron thit a man of y> the 50th had stolen a pair of long boots fiom the eh store he was m charge of, at the Queen's Redoubt. He said he knew the man, and he pointed out the prisoner, P.ituck Lavery. Mr. Cameron also said theie were two men in piisonei's company in the al stoic. He pointed out Privates Keishaw and Barth iatt. I got an escort and had prisoner sent to tho nt guaidrooin, on the charge so preferred by Mr. Camej yon. I was present when the prisoner was brought up before the Colonel. To the prisoner : Ihi ought you before the Colonel, lte but I made no charge. Ed Constable John King, sworn !I am one of tho ily armed police stationed at Papakura. I know tha o f prosecutor and piisoner I apprehended the prisoner- . this morning at the Queen's Redoubt, at half-past ?, seven o'clock, on a wan ant. I produce the boota L which were given to me by the prosecutor. &d The prisoner made a statement that the prosecutor, ite when before the Colonel, alleged that the robbery „„ took place at 11 o'clock in the day, and he had witf nesses to piove that he was confined m the guardloom at 11 o'clock on the day in question, but his nt witnesses would not be allowed to come down, k- Convicted and senteuced to 3 months impusoutvo ment and hard labour. m FDWItf AlirHUB MURRAY Y. JOHN HAIXORAN. This was an information against de r eudaut for on usinc iusultvtg and abusive language asjaiust plain. ln tiff, calculated to lead to a breach of the peace, *t Id- Papakura, on the sth instant. iy- Mr. Brookfipld appealed for the defendant. Plaintiff, being swoin, deposed • I am a carpenter -„ and builder, residing in Papakma On Monday, tho Mr sth September, I was with Mr. AValter in the village ;lle of Papakuia ; and when returning to Mi. Walter's er- I passed the defendant's, house. I wont into Mr. ids Waltot'sto look aftci my men, who were working i there. After I came out of Mr. Walter's house 1 had an axe in my hand, and was on the toad which Jnt divides Waltoi's fiom Halloran's. As I came out, an the Tirst woids defendant said were, "It is Mr. Miuray his been prompting you to this Why did yon not come yourself to buy the lambs?" Mr. m Walter was beside me. I cdled out, " Dou'b talto of my name in it at all— don't mention my name." He on then immediately called out, "No, you d— -— „» w r i Yo-i are Mr Muiray now, and living with jje Maiy Pollook. T said my wife had been subjected to annoyance, and if he came out I would settle the matter ISe suminauly with him. He said, " No, but do you in come in heie"— which I declined. I said I would ihe summon bun. He then made use of insulting lau,he goage ' especting the Eesideut MagistiateandComfc a at Papakuia, and said any summons I issued would , have to be tned m Auckland. mt Cioss-exarained by Mr. Brookfield : What I meant are by dealing summarily was that if he was agreeable *te w e could fight it out. When Walters was speaking W3 to Hallorau I was outside the house te the best of my knowledge 15 or 20 yauls.moieor less— certainly more than 12 yards. I did not hear what they were lan saying. The voids, " I suppose it is Murray has , ne piompted you to this," weie addressed to Walters. . They lefeired to something about a lamb When I heiul the words I told him m a quiet way, and not mG m the least nutated, not to mention my name. I of was chopping wood at the time. I h*ve tor beon above fivp yea-s in the olony ; and , e d I came fiom Glasgow in a man-of-war. I pissed by the name, of CUiule. When leaving the ' seruce I had not my dischaige, but that ii not the ' c? reason I wont by the name of Claude. I have not en ) my dischaige yet, but I have documents. The deo f fundant when using the expression "No," called me a w r. I then fiied up and wa» in a a *' passion, but not in a thundeiing passion. I swear I 3e(l did not use abusive lauguage to him, or oall him a led sheep atealer. There were present, beside* Mri, if Halloian, Mr. Walters, Mrs. Munroe, and a painter. I neither called him a thief nor a sheepsUaler, but I said I never had taken possession of unother man'« ; ' ie sheep. the George G. Walter, being sworn, deposed ; I aa» )dr settler, lesiiling m Papakura. 1 recollect this day n(r fortnight, and was present, thongh not at close quarters, at a quai i el bet« een plainti ff and defendant. os , e Defendant is m the habit of keeping goatt and * ■ s »" lamb, which are an annoyance to me. I auked one ces of plaintiff's men working at my house to go in and ask the defendant if he would sell the lamb. The man went, but said deftndaut would not sell. I heard defendant make use of very wicked and bad language respecting Mrs Murray— language in my opinion calculated to le«d to a breach of the peace. to Plaintiff was about cutting wood. The language wan ma commenced by Mr. Halloran. Cross-examined by Mr. Brookfield : I don t know ° that Mr. Murray was very hot on the occasion. *°- There -weie hard words on both sides, but decidedly be Halloran was the aggressor I cannot say who spoke If fiist. It might be two or three minutes after I came iev out of the house the quart el commenced. I was at \ home immediately before this. I did not hear any disrespectful language towaids tho magistrates made veß use of by Halloran. Me John Dickenson, swoin, deposed : I am a painter to residing in Papakura. I remember being asked by } lils Mr. Walters to ask Halloran to sell his l«mb. I was standing under the verandah, and could hear distinctly Halloran's saying that plaintiff's name was 113 not Muriay— that he skulked in the bush, and had ree urn away fiom his ship, and had got entaugled with me this gnl Mary Pollock, with whom he was living. O s e He said he was a d— d logue. Cross examined by Mr. Biookfield: Murray was ™ S chopping fiiewood. The conversation commenced > when I went to inquire about the lamb. I took ?st back the message that Halloran w ould not sell the ly. lamb. I never heard Muriay speak uutil Halloran •d commenced. Halloran said, "I would see him " ' d — d first befoi c I would sell him the lamb." 1 Mr. Brookfield addiessed the Bench, and after C( * forcibly relying upon disci epancies and contradictions in the evidence of plaintiff and hia witnesses, called Anno Carr, who being, sworn, deposed : lam -wife re- of Richaid Carr, labouier, and reside m Papakura. m- I lecollect this day fortnight when 'there was a quarrel between plaintiff aud defendant. I heard

the words, but not everything; that passed owing to n»y jmhy'a crying. I heard a little bad language usjdFbiit not much, by Mimay. Mr. Murray saTd that Halloian was a. b xogue and a sheep■tealer, and that if he would como out ho would punch his b head for him. Cross-examined by plaintiff : This took place on Monday. I saw Mr. Walters and Hallorau ou the ro»d. I did not see you, but I heard your voice. \\ hen the row first commenced I was m my own place. It was Mr. Halloran'a voice I first heaid. I cannot say what time elapsed when I heard yon say Hallornn was a rogne. The defendant was ordeied to enter into secmity by recognizances, himself and two snretios in the sum of £20 eacb, to be of good behaviour towards plaintiff for throe months, and was on the point of being rodnocd to a very disatjieeablo alternative, when Messrs. Ciispe and W. J. Young with laud.ible ami praiseworthy benevolence came to the rescue consenting to enter into the necessary bond. This was a summons hesml upon a foimor day, and was for recovery of £1 35., the pi ice of a sheet), the innocent cause of so much ill-feeling displayed in the piecediug case. The matter now stood foi judgment, and his Woislnp, after pointing out the duty incumbent upon crery finder of stray animals or other property to seek by advertusment and otherwise forthe rightful owner, beforo converting the same to their own use, gave judgment for the plaintiff, 10s., the original price of the animal, and costs. I'LKTCHER Y. LO\UX. Summons for £3 Is, Sd., amount of a butcher's bill for meat Theie being no do'ence, judgment for plaintiff, £3 Is. Sd. and costs. NOLAN Y. MCKENZIE. Summons for £5 10s., amount claimed for cavtincr of goods No appearance of defendant ; judgment for plaintiff, £5 10s. and costs. MCWILLIAMS Y. STEWUID. Summons for £4 6s. Cd., amouut claimed on foot of an hotel bill No appearance of defendant ; judgmeut for plaintin, £4 6s. 6d. and costs. FITZGERALD V HILL. Summons for £2, the value of a dog. Settled out of court. WALTER Y. HOVIFOTtD. This was a snmmous for £2, the value of a cheque cashed by plaintiff for defendant at the Mauku, under the circumstances stated m the evidonco. George G. Walter, the plaintiff, sworn : lam a settler leading in Papakura. I leceivod from my brother, William Walter, who was my care taker at the Mauku, a cheque on the Bank of* New Zealand for £2, drawn by one —Warden, and payable to Benjamin Homford. I presented this cheque at the Bank of New Zealand, and received for answer— "there was no account." I cannot state the exact date of the cheque, but in three days after <*ettin<r it I presented it at the Bank. I then returned it° to my brother. I afterwards saw the defendant in Dairy. I asked him, ' ' Did you cash a cheque at my house in the Mauku ! " He said he did, for £2. I told him it was dishonoured in the Bauk , that I was going to the Mauku next day, and I would bring down the cheque, and leave it with Mr. Blake Mr. Young's blacksmith. I told him he could leave the money with Mr. Blake for me He did not say he would not do so. Within a few days after I w ent to the Mauku and brought the cheque down. The defendant was staudmg on the road. I saw him, and gavo him the cheque again, telling him ho could pay Mr. Blake, or give me the money. He (tho do fendant) then took the cheque, said it was not endorsed by him, aud he said that theiofore he would not pay it. Cross-examined hy defendant : I certaiuly said you might give the money to Mr Blake. I did fcpeak to yon when I met you again in Druiy. William Walters, swoni • 1 am the plaiutift's brother, and have been in charge ot tins publichouse at the Mauku. The defendant, about fom oi five weeks ago, called with a tup to my brothel's. He .md his companion, E. Warden, had lefieshment, after which defendant presented me with a bank cheque for £2, signed by JE. Warden, i ayable to the defendant or bearer, and asked me if I would cash it. I sai.l 1 would do so It was Warden called for the refreshment, nnd said he would pay for it, but did not do so at that time. I ga\ c two pounds cash to the defendant for the cheque, because I know him and to oblige him. I put the cheque in the box, aud af tern aids gave it to my brother with other money, A!y brother sent me back the cheque m a letter, stating it was no good— that theie were no funds. Cross examined by defend mt : The young man Warden, when he came to the hotel, called for refreshments. I did not then know his name was ■Warden, but Major Speedy subsequently told me his name. Warden did not ask me to take one of his cheques. When jou presented the cheque to me Wai den said it was one of kis cheques I did pau^e and study the cheque before taking it. He said he was going to work on Major Speedys faim, but he did not «ay he would be accountable forthe cheque. No one has ever paid for the refreshment supplied that day. You did not pay for^i^. You did not "ire me that cheque in payment for the refreshment. I simply cashed it to oblige you. I did not tell Mr. Warden that I would cash the 01160110' to oblige him ° Judgment foi' plaintiff for £2 and costs.