THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 12767, 21 March 1906, Page 4

THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

CITY POLICE COURT. (B«fore C. C. Graham, Esq., S.M.) Cattle Wandering.—Sarah Ann Hopewell pleaded not guilty to allowing cattle to wander at Rurnside.— Evidence was given by Inspector Bain.—Defendant was fined 5s and coats (7s). —-John Gardiner pleaded guilty to the same offence, the animal in this case being a horse found on the Main South road.—He was fined 5s and costs (7s). i Father and Sou.—Andrew Hunter was charged with having assaulted George Hunter, who prayed that the former be bound over to keep the peace, and to find sureties for so doing. Mr Dbwnie Stewart appeared for the complainant, aiyl Mr B. S. Irwin for the defendant," who pleaded not guilty —Mr Downie Stewart sgid that tho facts were that the complainant was a wellknown contractor living in Cavertham, and with lxira lived his sons. The son Andrew on frequent occasions had quarrels with his father, and the evidence would show that he was in the habit of coming home in a quarrelsome state of mind. On the 10th of the month he came home, his father was in bed reading : the 'Star.' He entered his father's room and started lansacking the pockets of his father';? clothes for money. When the latter protested the defendant rushed at him, and commenced to attack him in a violent manner. The complainant defended himself as best he could. After the accused left him, complainant found that he was somewhat seriously injured, and got up and went to the hospital. He found that two ribs were broken, and. that he would have to undergo treatment for some time Complainant gave evidence that accused rushed at him, saying he weald do for him, and then battered'him on the face and ribs. He (accused) was the worse of liquor at the time.—Gross-examined: He (witness) had taken drink for a long time, but had never drunk to excess. He had had one glass this morning. None of his family ad ever complained to him. about- drink. An application for a prohibition order had been made against liim, but complainant (his son) had not appeared.—The defendant (examined by Sir Irwin) said that he was in town on the evening in question, and went hqme about a quarter-past He did not have -a single drink," and did not even see hjfi father when he went ham©. He had never assaulted his father." Ou one occasion he' was sitting reading when his father came in, asked for the lamp, and subsequently threw it at Ms (witness's) head. About a. week ago he made application for a prohibition order against has father, but "did not appear to support the application, because they (the family) wanted to give him another chance.- —Crossr.examinedi: He would depy that he went into hjs father's zoom at all on that evening. He had been in disturbances in which Police Court proceedings had followed, but not of late years. He believed that his father was hurt, but it- was not the first time ho had come home marked and could not tell how he got into that condition. —The case was dismissed, solicitor's costs (ope guinea) being allowed against complainant.