MAYOR’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2700, 12 October 1871, Page 2

MAYOR’S COURT.

v This Day. (Before his Worship the Mayor.) DRUNKENNESS. James Banett was fined 5s for the above offence, CHARGE OV ASSAULT AND ATTEMPTING TO SHOOT. James Beattie was charged with stealing from Andrew Duckworth, five rabbits, and also placing hi!? 1 i n bodily fear at the Peninsula, on Saturday afternapn last. Mr Haggitt appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Stout for prisoner. Andrew Duckworth said be lived at Anderson’s Bay. He lemembered Saturday, 7th of October last. He was out shooting on that day, Mr Neil and Mr Grant being in company with him. They shot a few rabbits, and witness was carrying some of them. Id the afternoon they were coming through the paddock by a short cut from the Ocean Beach to the Portobello road, when they saw prisoner, who rushed out at him and took the rabbits from him, saying they were his rabbits. Grant was loading his gun at the time, and asked witness to hold it, which he did, while Grant went and ;ook the rabbits from him again. After that prisoner took a large stone and threatened to strike Mr Neil with it. He did strike the dog on the head with it, and ran into the bush. They went on to the road, and piisoner came there with a big stick, and told him to mention the names of the parties with him. They threw the prisoner down and went away ; but before doing so he went up to Grant and said, if he had his double-barrelled gun he would put a shot through him. Prisoner went away. Witness and his friends also turned back again and walked to the corner of the road, and when they got near the corner they saw prisoner coming towards them with his gun. When about ten paces from him he cocked both barrels of his gun, and presented the gun at him, until he walked up to him and took from him five rabbits, which witness was carrying. He was in bodily fear, and considered his life in danger. Cross-examined by counsel: He was aeonstomed to shoot rabbits, but had not shot any on prisoner’s land. He bad heard prisoner had rabbits. The cause of Grant loading his gun was that he might get a shot at a rabbit in prisoner’s paddock. When prisoner came up he claimed the rabbits as his own. Grant took the rabbits from prisoner, and laid him quietly down on the sand. (Laughter.) He noticed that the gun which prisoner presented at thorn was fully cocked. Alexander Grant said he was at work at the Blueskin Flax Mills. On Saturday last he was out shooting with Mr Neil and young Duckworth, on the Peninsula. They were coming home, when on entering a field he saw a rabbit, at which be raised his gun and attempted to shoot it. He was reloading his gun when he board a noise, and saw a man coming down the hill. The man rushed at Duckworth, and 'took five rabbits from him forcibly. Witness walked up, when he was seized by the comer of the coat'; witness

tlien threw the prisoner. Prisoner then said if he had his double barrel he would put.a shot into him. While he had prisoner on the ground Neil came up and said, “ This is not the way to behave. Why do you not tell us who you arc ?” Witness told prisoner not a single rabbit had been shot upon his place, although he admitted firing at one. If he had shot one lie was willing to pay for it. Prisoner said he did not want pay, but he would put a stop to their little game. Prisoner seized a big stone, and threa- ened 'Veil with it. They then went away quietly out on to the road, and soon afterwards saw prisoner appear with his coat off, his sleeves tucked up, and a double barrelled gun in his hand coming towards them. He cocked both barrels, saying at the same time, ‘‘Let’s see what you can do now.” Prisoner presented his gun at I Hickworth, who was carrying the five rabbits, the muzzle pointed at Duckworth’s head. Prisoner kept the gun in one hand, about six inches from Duckworth’s head, and with the other seized the rabbits. Prisoner then backed off, lacing them all the time. They saw prisoner take the rabbits into ' he bush.

Cross-examined by Mr Stout: Witness had shot rabbits before?- He was loading his gun, expecting to get a shot at a rabbit. He was aware they were on private ground. Prisoner seized witness first. They both rolled down together, an ! witness saw broken eggs which prisoner had been carrying with him in a billy. Prisoner never mentioned that their dogs frightened his cattle. When prisoner came up with his gun he pointed it within six inches of Duckworth’s head. He believed he saw his finger on the trigger. It must have been anfoptical delusion if it was not, Percival Neil, merchant: He was one of a shooting party which went out on Saturday last. He was in company with Grant and a boy named Duckworth. They shot rabbits along the Ocean Bi a ;h. In coming home be went through the bush. Wnen in the paddock he heard a voice violently shouting. He looked round and saw Grant and the prisoner on the ground. Witness thought they were fighting and walked up to them and told Grant not to strike the man. Grant replied “Never fear, I won’t strike him; hut he must give up the rabbits ” Witness said to prisoner that was not the way to behave, who was he? He said his name was Boattie, and the paddock belonged to him, and they had shot his rabbits. Witness replied if they had so they would pay him for them He gave up his name and address, and told prisoner if he had any claim I e would settle it, but he must not take the law in his own hands. Prisoner was very abusive and violent. After his party had gone off the paddock on to the road, prisoner came with his coat off, and a gun in his > hand, and when about ten yards off, cocked it, saying, “we will see what you will do now.” He presented the gun at Duckworth Witness noticed the gun was capped on both nipples. He took the rabbits away from Duckworth. In cross-examination, witness said be gave his name and address, so that if he had killed prisoners rabbits he might pay him. He was sure prisoner fully cocked his gun. He believed prisoner held the gun in both his ban's. He never asked Duckworth to give information to the police. Witness gave information himself to Mr Weldon.

Mr Stout, on behalf of prisoner, said in his opinion the charge ought to be instantly dismissed. If there was the least color -of right on the part of the accused to the' rabbits, it must at once destroy the felonious taking. , The evidence showed that there was that color of right. Mr Neil and others acknowledged the paddock belonged to Beattie, and he would prove he had been in the habit of rearing rabbits. The facts were these: —Prisoner was a member.of the Highway Board at the Peninsula. He was coming home from that meeting, and his wife not being very well, drove the cows through the paddock, and they on hearing the shooting were alarmed. He was also carrying a billy containing ten turkey eggs, and on seeing three men with guns and Duckworth with live rabbits slinging on his back coming through his paddock, he jumped to the conclusion that the rabbits belonged to him, and snatched ihem from Duckworth. Grant resisted this, and in the struggle both rolled down the saud hill about twenty feet, and in the tussel the eggs were destroyed. This no doubt irritated the man, and made him say what he would do if he had his gun. But that such were only words spoken in the excitement of the moment was proved by the fact that, when the man went home the first time, he took off his coat, tucked up his sleeves, and proceeded to empty the milkcans, work w'hich occupied some quarter of an hour. Mr Beattie expressing a wish to have a rabbit for dinner on the succeeding day, he then took up his gun, and before it gets dork went out for the purpose of shooting one. On prisoner coming into his paddock; he again sees Duckwork and Neil, and goes up and seizes the rabbits in the state mentioned with coat off. That he could hold a gun in one hand with intention to shoot and snatch away the rabbits with the other was ridiculous. He thought altogether that it was very unfortunate such a charge such have been brought against the prisoner.

Mr Jewitt, in evidence, said he had frequently bought rabbits of prisoner, and knew he was in the habit of selling them. John iMatheson, farmer, Peninsula, said he leased the paddock in question to Beattie, and he knew prisoner had introduced rabbits into that neighborhood, and if he saw any in the paddock he should consider they belonged to Beattie. His Worship said the prisoner had been charged with robbery with violence. He agreed with Mr Stout that in such a case the intention of the prisoner so charged should be considered, and he could not think for a moment that the prisoner intended to commit robbery. The prisoner naturally thought that the rabbits shot in his own ground belonged to him. That being the case, his conduct in taking the rabbits was to a certain extent excusable, although at the same time he was not uublameable in all he did. Under the circumstances he could no nothing else than discharge the prisoner. CHARGE OF FORGERY. Arthur Drummond was charged with feloniously uttering a certain forged cheque, of the value of L2 2s Cd, with intent to defraud Thomas Hancock, of Dunedin. The case was remanded.

A Financial Query. —To want ten thousand pounds, and raise them upon one’s estate, is an act of everyday occurrence, and one of which no one is ashamed ; but to want fire poun ts, and to borrow it on mortgage of your watch, is disgraceful in the eyes of the world. Why this difference ‘1 Let the world explait) if it can.