MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1274, 18 April 1878, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, April 18. (Before G. L. lee, Esq., and Hr. Deamer, J.P.’s] Drunk and Disorderly.— Henry Hamblin, for being drunk and using obscene language, was fined 20s. Emma Pepperill was remanded until Saturday. Mary Client was lined 40s, and a first offender ss. Wounding with Intent. —John Tamouski, a foreigner, was charged on remand with stabbing Richard Beale in the neck with a knife on the night of the Sth April. Mr A. Schwartz was sworn as interpreter. Dr Nedwill called, stated that the prosecutor had been under his care in the hospital since 9th inst. Witness was sent for, and found the man was suffering from loss of blood from a wound in the neck, near one of the large arteries. He had also two other wounds, one on the outward side of the right eye, and the other on the side of the head. One of his hands was also cut; it was the left hand. It was in consequence of the wounds in the neck being in the neighborhood of large vessels that the man had been detained in the Hospital so long. The wounds must have been caused by an instrument with a sharp point. Could not say how deep the wound was, ns it was not advisable to probe it. A knife with a sharp point would cause the wound. The man had had a most narrow escape, as the wound was in the immediate neighborhood of thecartoid artery. The man was now out of danger, but was not at present fit for his ordinary occupation. The wound on the side of the head was a clean cut wound, about half an inch long and down to the bone. It must have been inflicted with a sharp cutting instrument. ■Witness had not seen the wound on the hand, but believed it to have been a superficial one. The man was under witness in his capacity of visiting surgeon, and had the house surgeon not loft the Hospital he would have been present to give evidence. With the exception of the wound in the neck, the others were not dangerous. Richard Beale, prosecutor, called, stated that he was a laborer, and had lately been working at Moffat’s Mills, Addington. Knew the accused. Was in his company at the Junction Hotel, Lincoln road, on Monday, the Sth inst. They were drinking together, and left about a quarter-past ten at night. On the way to their tent accused said to witness this is the way we fight in our country. He then rushed at him and stabbed him. Did not see what he had in his hand. Accused stabbed him in the hand, cheek, and neck. Did not know what sort of instrument he was stabbed. Witness was stabbed three times heavily, and lightly three or four times. Witness was three part s intoxicated at the time, and could not remember their having any conversation before being stabbed with. Accused was also nearly drunk. The first thing witness remembered was hearing blood falling on the ground. He called out for assistance, and Wm, Pascoe came and took him into the tent and bathed his wounds. They were about 200 yards from the tent when the assault took place, and about three-quarters of a mile from the hotel. Witness and accused had had a quarrel three days previously. Knew that the accused owned two knives. Saw the large one with him the same day. It was a sheath knife. Accused used to cut tobacco with the small knife. Witness was conveyed to the Hospital the same night, and had been there since suffering from the effects of the wounds inflicted by accused. Witness would not be able to return to work at present. Had known the accused for about six months. Since then they have been working together, and lived in the same tent for about ten days. Witness could not remember any conversation taking place prior to the assault. In cross examination, the witness said he thought he had a struggle with accused after he spoke of the way they fought in their country. Witness did not put his hand in accused’s pocket. Thomas Mullens, licensee of the Junction Hotel, gave evidence of both of the men being at his house on • the night in question. They were drinking and left together, about half-past nine. They seemed to be sober and very sociable, and bade witness good night. There was no quarrel between them while they were in the house. Next saw the defendant the following morning, when he was brought to the house by a constable. Saw no knife in possession of accused the night he was at the hotel. In cross-examination witness said he charged a cheque for accused for £lO 3s Bd, but could not say whether it was on that night. William R-scoe deposed to being awakened on Monday night week by accused shouting out. Witness went and epoke to him, but he did not reply. Then beard the prosecutor call out from the road, and said he was dying. Witness went to him and struck a match, and saw he was covered with blood. Took him to where the steam engine was and bathed him. He found he could not stop the blood, and he and his mate bound up the man’s head and brought him into the hospital. Witness borrowed a clasp knife from accused that day at dinner time, and returned it to him. Constable Daly gave evidence of arresting the accused on Monday morning. He made signs when told the charge that the man stabbed had struck him in the mouth with his clenched fist. Witness searched the accused’s tent, hut could not find any knife. Accused gave the coat produced to witness, and said it was the same he wore on the night of the assault. There were bicod stains on it, and they appeared to be fresh at the time. There was a stain of blood on accused’s left hand when arrested. In cross-examination the witness said there was a red mark on accused’s forehead which he said the prosecutor had caused. The Bench decided to send the case for trial, and after the evidence had been read over, accused reserved his defence and was committed to take his trial at the next criminal sessions of the Supreme Court.

Assatlting a Bailiff. —Abraham Summons was charged with assaulting William Kent, one of the assistant bailiffs of the Kesident Magistrate’s Court, on the Gasworks road, Waltham. Prosecutor stated he went to Mr Forster’s, at Waltham, on the day named to execute a warrant. Witness took possession of a horse, and was bringing it away on the Gasworks road, when accused took hold of the horse’s head and refused to let him go. Witness called out, and some men came over, and spoke to accused, who let go. Witness then went on, and after a little while he came up and stopped him again. Witness remonstrated with him, and accused then took oft' his coat and struck witness repeatedly, lie also made use of obscene and threatening language, and said he supposed he would have to pay 10s for the assault. Witness used no provocation and as accused was under the influence of drink ho tried all he could to pacify accused. James McLcary, residing at Waltham, gave evidence of seeing the accused shoving the previous witness about. Saw the prosecutor, fall before he (witness) got up to _ them. Witness held the'accused and heard him call Kent an old scoundrel. There was a horse standing on the road at the time, In reply

to the Bench accused denied having struck the man or taking hold of the horse. Fined £5 and expense of witness, in default one week’s imprisonment. Cruelty to a Horse. —William Crooks was charged on warrant with cruelty to a horse on the Lincoln road on 3rd April. Mr Longhnan appeared for the accused. J. A. Williams called, stated that he lived at Hallswell. Ho knew that aceusod was in the habit of carrying papers round (lie district. A horse belonging to accused had his leg broken at Hal-well on the day named, and he was {'laced in a paddock and left there for about eight days, when he died. Thomas Hamilton stated that he saw a horse belonging to accused in his paddock. Did not see the animal put in. Spoke to the accused on the 10th instant about taking it away, and he promised to do so. The horse’s leg was broken, and he hobbled about on three legs. Witness had his man to give the horse water. The animal seemed to be suffering very much, and in witness’ opinion it died from the effects of the injury and hunger. Other evidence was given of the state of the horse, and his remaining neglected by the accused after being told the state it was in. The prosecutor, who was examined, stated that on the day in question the animal fell down with him, and when .it got up he saw it was lame, aud put it into Hamilton’s paddock. He used to see the horse every second day, and observed it was feeding. The shoulder was out, but the horse’s leg was not broken. At last, seeing the animal was not getting bettor, he paid a man named Kent, at Riccarton, £1 on the Tuesday to kill and carry it away, and on the Friday following he learnt to his surprise that Kent had not gone as promised. Witness called to see Mr Hill, veterinary surgeon, about the horse, but missed him each time. After Mr Loughnan had addressed the Bench, the case was dismissed. LYTTELTON. Thursday, April 18. [Before W. Donald, Esq., R.M., T. 11. Potts, and 11. R. Webb, Esqs., J.P.’s.] Larceny. —John Wilson, on remand from Wednesday, was charged with the above offence. Prosecutor, whose name is Oipson, not Gibson, as previously stated, re-called, said —The change I got from Mr Wood on Tuesday for a £l-note was in half-crowns and florins. I changed the note after breakfast, not before. I had two drinks before breakfast that day. Prisoner and myself went to Mrs Beverley’s on Tuesday morning. I shouted drinks for prisoner, myself, and another man. I cannot say how long 1 stopped there. I believe wo had another lot of drinks before we went. Prisoner asked me to give him the price of the drinks to pay for them, so that the people should not think he was a loafer. I gave him Is 6d. I gave it him quietly, and he handed it to the landlady as payment for the three drinks. lum not sure how many drinks I had at Mrs Beverley’s. Ido not recollect changing a note at Mrs Beverley’s, but Idoat Mr Wood’s. I had £l4 when I came to Christchurch on Monday, It consisted of notes and a £7 cheque. Prisoner asked me to shout several times, as he had no money. By Prisoner—You did pay for your own dinner aud breakfast at Mr Wood’s, but I gave you the money to do so. By the Bench —I only spent a few shillings in Christchurch, when I came down to Lyttelton. Lachlan MTnnis deposed to seeing accused in the Canterbury Hotel on Monday night from 8.30 p.m. to 11 p.m. He shouted for four people. Mary Ann Beverley, licensee of the Baxon Hotel, deposed to seeing prosecutor and the accused in her place on Monday and Tuesday, and seeing prosecutor shout. On Saturday saw accused in her place. He sold a coat for 5s to a man. W, W. Wood, licensee of the Lyttelton Hotel, stated that prosecutor and accused came to his house on Monday evening. They slept at his house, prosecutor paying for the beds and shouting. Accused appeared to have no money. Prosecutor was asleep in the billiard room on Tuesday afternoon. The accused had been an hour out of the house before the loss of tho money was reported. Witness advised him to communicate with the police. Frederick King deposed to accused staying at his place from March 19th to April 6bh, during which time he worked two days. In defence, prisoner said he changed a note at the Canterbury on Monday night. This note was one out of two given to him by a sailor friend, who had gone away, and who had just come down from the country, where he had been potato digging. The sailor who gave him the money was named Thompson, He (prisoner) had worked two days for the Circus company. The Bench said that though there were grave suspicions against accused, the evidence of prosecutor was so contradictory that they must dismiss the case. -