CITY POLICE COURT. (Before E. H. Car'ew, Esq., R.M., and J. Logan, Esq., J.P.) Drunkenness. Josejih Robinson and George Anderson were each fined ss, in default twenty-four hours' imprisonment. Unstamped Measures.— Ebemzer Kiagaford, against whom there were two charges of having unstamped weights in his possession, was fined Is and costs in each case, Mr Solomon appeared for the defendant. Threatening Language.— William Burton, a lad, was charged with using threatening language towards Thomas Johnston. Mr D. M. Stuart appeared for the complainant ; Mr E. Cook for the defendant. —The complainant deposed that he had discharged the defendant from his employ, and that the lad then went to the shop and used most insulting language towards him.—The Bench were of opinion that the defendant's conduct was very imprudent, and ordered him to find a surety in the sum of L 5 to keep the peace for six months, also to pay costs (17s 6d). Sureties of the Peace.— Walter Hamilton, described on the information as gentleman, was charged on the complaint of Abraham Moss for that he did, on the 28th and 30th ult., at Dunedin, threaten to kill and shoot the complainant, and did assault and beat him, and for that he did to other persons make similar threats, wherefore the complainant was in fear of bodily harm, and asked for sureties of the peace._ Mr Solomon appeared for the complainant; Mr Gallaway for the defendant.—ln opening the case Air Solomon said that defendant justly thought he had very grave cause of complaint against the complainant. In a case of assault that would be good ground for provocation, but not so in a case of this nature, where defendant pertinaciously followed the complainant with the avowed intention of inflicting on him grievous bodily harm. If the defendant had received aggravation—and there was no question he had received serious aggravation—he had plenty of means of enforcing his remedy. As it was, his conduct was so very violent And threatening that it would be necessary for his own sake, as well as for the protection of the complainant, that he should be bound over to keep the peace. Perhaps it was not unreasonable that a man smarting under a serious grievance should feel desperate; but at the same time he could not be allowed to take the law into his own hands, especially when he knew other remedies ware available. The evidence would show that it was absolutely unsafe to allow the defendant to be at large without restraint.— AbraJ-am Moss, a turf commission agent, deposed that ]\g saw defendant on Saturday last about 7.30 p.m. ile was standing outside the Grand Hotel, when-he was informed that a gentleman wanted to see him. On. going inside Mr Hamilton asked him to accompany him to a house in Maitland street, vMch he ultimately did. Defendant there attempted to strike him, but he evaded him. Two friends of his, who had followed him up, rushed into the room and prevented him from getting a thrashing from defendant and two oilier men who wore in the room. On Monday afternoon he was told that some one—not Mr Hamilton—wanted to see him at the Auld Scotland Hotpl. He went there, and Tsfv Hamilton' made a grab a]t him, poking his firmer In witness's eye. Defendant told Win that jf l»e woujd not fight he would " stiffen " him, Witness feared that whenever defendant saw him he would molest him, and might possibly shoot him. Defendant wanted to fight, but witness did not feel inclined to. Each time he had seen defendant he had been very excitable, and behaved like a madman. He had always forced witness into a row in onto* L, protect himself. To Mr Gallaway: He firefc mu.%, Hamilton's acquaintance about February Ifcf. Jifi feev Hamilton's wife. He remembered on- 'teatardwY night last telling defendant hje 1 had l heard that | he hai ». revolver, so Mr Watson; searched him Mid satisfied witness lie had: not. Witness told him that if he did not lca.ve him alone ho would have to strike defendant with' Mils Stick.— George Weir,; waiter fcb tlit. Baldwin Hotel, stated that' defendant was .at the }iotol on Monday j night pi 4, very exoit,ed state askjing for the! eoiuviwm- W> JBW I *e"Md giyej»yj man L 25 who mM $4 complainant ,-fith his wife.—Frank 'SVooas, kff goinnnssion a</ci)t> g ave evidence that <i«W n i!;.nt came t<> his house about two o'clock] on Tuesday morning asking for his wife. He said nothing ahoufc complaining Witness followed compluina.ut »ud defendant * p au hotel iu Maitland street - I Witness ! flft'd .'3»V femucls separated them, and then they tepftlt'eit <&J»dp, where they hwj three or lour VofomlS.' Af*** *W n said he had j f b.d "enough;" and ' defendant re-/ plied t ; not be satisfied till'he! had Moss's last «U'op 'Witness saw! th<? w*»«i« Wjtsjde the Ai¥d'SxQtetonsJJotelj on Monday, Afte,' : jyar,ds Ifeiniltyu sw " I will follow Mr Moss vWwgp he goes. He is jjoing to Ghristchurch, and i win go, #;£f,e and stay at the same hotel. I will not bo satisfied till I have his last drop of blood." To Mr Gallaway : Moss raised his stick on Sptprday night, but no blowß were struck, -Cjciiii turf commission agent, k/iipsyJn evidence as to what took place' jjlaitland and Auld Scotland hotels'.—Mr. would be gathered from what had transpired that there were'certain facts which both
parties considered it impolitic should be made public. So as the evidence adduced went, the complainant had been subjected to no violence, and it could not be believed that the defendant in his sober senses would carry out the threat he had excitedly used, viz., '< that he would have the last drop of Mr MqjsVbibod." That a fight was anticipated would, be gathered from the .fact that the witnesses Samuels and Woods had been dogging; Hamilton's footsteps whenever they belhjvei that Moss wai with him. . fife thought the ease was a trivial one, and hardly called for sureties.— Mr Carew : There is no evidence that complainant is in bodily fear of his life, but there is ample evidence he is in fear that defendant will do him some bodily harm, both from what he done.,and .whafche,.lias stated. —Mr Gallaway proceeded to state that so fai~,as defendant's •! threat "of fol» lowing complainant to Christchurch was concerned, his client had no intention of proceeding to Chrlstohurch.—'The Bench : We think there is cleariy a case to answer, on the ground, that defendant- would do him some bodily harm. —Mr Gallaway intimating that he did not intend to put his client into the box, the Bench stated that the case merely resolved itself into a question of the necessary amount of recognisances. What were the defendants circumstances I —Mr Gallaway replied tViat he was what was known in the colonies as a remittance man. For the last six months he had been living in Dunedin.—Defendant was bound over to keep the peace for twelve months in his own-recognisance for LSO and two sureties for L 25 each, or one surety; for ! LSO. He was also ordered to pay costs.