RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 5006, 1 February 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday, January 31. (Boforo R. Beotham, Esq., R.M.) BREACHES OF BYE-LAWS. Hrs Worship intimated that ho would postpone hia decision in theae cases until the following clay. DAXE V. PEATTIE. The further hearing of this case was then proceeded with. It was an action for £100 damages for an alleged assault committed on plaintiff, on board the ship Renfrewshire, by tho captaiu of tho vosaol, on the Bfch November last. Mr Roes for plaintiff ; Mr Oottorill and Mr Oornford for dofondant. Tho next witness oallod for tho dofonco was Oharlos Barrott King, who doponod : I was schoolmaster on board tho whip Renfrewshire I rocolloot tho Bth Novombor. There was a disturbance on that ovoning at tho main hatoh. At tho time tho hatchoii woro battened down I was bolow tho main hatch. I could hoar Homo altercation botwoon tho captain and tho doctor. The latfcor wan domunding that; Uio halohuij bo oponod. Tho captain Haid, "No ono etui go bolow." Shortly aftorwurda tho natch was forced opon by Homo one ; I don't know who. Mont of u« fhon cmiio on dock. TJio captain and tho doctor woi'o there, tho captain ordering Uio o'ftr* pontor to put tho hiiUthm (Iftv/ii au&'m, Tho doctor roHistod putting ihnui down again, and wa» calling oihbra U> fisstai* him. Tho captain ihon durnd Miyunfj U) put a hand on thorn, ami thvntiifitwl U) shoot any pornom who did. 'VAui AfSm was Hpoaking to the pasfion^ers when h§ asked for assistance. Tho ducUn' «?iid toe would koop tho hatcho« up, and Giudi&jnuedthe captain to shoot him. In my opinum the doctor was drunk, although not in. a very bad condition. After tho doctor dared the captain, the latter laid hold of the doctor and said, " You thing ; you're not worth hitting." That was the ■only assault I witnessed. I was sent for to the cabin next morning. The captain said he had called us there to show ■us how foolishly we had acted 'the previous night. He said something about the doctor's stubbornness, and called him same ugly names. We were called down again after that ; the doctor and the captain were present. The captain said that the doctor had almost incited the passengers to mutiny the previous night, and if such a thing occurred again, he would run us into the nearest port. He also said that the doctor had acted like a fool, but that he had since apologised to him. He turned to the doctor and said, "Is that not so, doctor 1" and the doctor inclined his head in assent. Cross-examined by Mr Rees : I have seen the doctor drunk on several occasions. He looked a little heavy and stupid about the eyes on the occasion referred to. I do not remember a word being said about challenging to fight. The captain called the doctor a coward. The doctor did not say he desired peace. He said, "I don't wish to quarrel with you, captain." I knew some married women were unwell in the married people's compartments. The heat had increased. The ship was not pitching much, but the clouds were heavy and threatening just previously. I cannot remember anything about how the sails were set. I assisted in raising the hatchway. By the Bench : I remember the hatches being battened down. I was on the deck when the captain came along and ordered us all down. This was probably twenty minutes before our hatch was forced down. I heard the doctor demand that the hatch be opened. It was about five minutes after that time that I got up. Andrew Baxter deposed : I am second mate of the ship Renfrewshire. I remember the Bth November, and the disturbance that took place that evening. The doctor wanted to go down the hatchway, but the captain said he could go down by the ventilator, that he could not go down the hatchway, as it would be endangering the ship and all on board. The doctor called out for some one to assist him, and said, "Who's for the doctor, and who's for the captain?" He then took hold of the tarpaulin to force it off, and told some of the men to put it over the side. The captain ordered the hatch to be secured. I then went away aft, as it was my watch on deck. I could see | the doctor distinctly from where I was standing. lam positive he was under j the influence of liquor. I saw the cap- \ tain and the doctor down in the cabin the same night. After the doctor had wrenched the tarpaulin off, he called to | some of the men to come aft to the cabin. I asked the doctor what he wanted with all these men down in the cabin. He said he wanted to get his clothes up. I said one man would be sufficient for that. He asked what authority I had for stopping the men from going down. I said that I had charge of the cabin, but I did not want to stop him going down with one man. Cross-examined by Mr Rees : It wa3 gloomy, threatening weather when the hatches were battened down that night. The flying-jib and small staysails were all taken in. There was no sea on. We took the sails in on account of expected bad weather, as we were in the place for it. The first I heard of the dispute at the hatch between the doctor and the captain was when the captain and I went forward to the main hatch. The doctor came up and said, "I want to get down below." I did not hear him say what he wanted to get down for. The captain said he could not get down that way. The doctor was excited, and was under the influence of liquor. When he was sober he was always quiet, and when he was intoxicated he always wanted to be master. I saw him drink one glass of brandy that afternoon. I was away aft for about two minutes. I did not hear the captain threaten to shoot the doctor, nor did I hear the doctor say he wanted to go down to see some patients. I saw the captain put his hands on the doctor's coat and ask him, "Doctor, do you know what you are doing?" I was in the cabin that night with the captain, the doctor, and the steward. The captain asked the doctor if he was aware what he had done that night. After a word or two, the doctor said he was sorry for it. I did not see the captain put his hand on the doctor. The doctor was always able to do his duty. I have had no disputes with the doctor. I never challenged him to fight, either on the ship or on the quarantine island. I might have used language that would not be agreeable to the doctor, had he been there, ) but I apologised for it afterwards. Thomas Donaldson deposed : lam carpenter on board the Renfrewshire. I remember, after I battened the hatches down, the doctor came forward to the main hatch and said he wanted to go down. The captain told the doctor that he could not go down at present, that he had fastened the hatches down. The doctor said he must get down, and that he would force the hatches open. The captain told him that he would allow no man to open the hatches till he gave orders to do so, and that the first man that touched them he would blow their brains out. There was another way of getting down, by the ventilator. I have gone down by it myself. The doctor said, " Lay aft here ; I must get down." I was close to the doctor. lam certain he was intoxicated. Cross-examined by Mr Rees : lam sure the doctor was intoxicated, because he could not stand straight. I saw him throw off his coat to, fight the captain, and defied the captain to put a hand on him. The captain said he would not demean himself to lift his hand to such a cur as the doctor was. The doctor then tore the tarpaulin off. I was not warned out of the single girls' compartment. Whenever I was down there I was on duty. I never refused to assist the matron in closing the hatchway of the single girls' compartment,

Re-examined by Mr Ootterill : It was part of my duty to go down to the single girls' compartment every day. I had permission from the doctor to go down there and take water every day. William Madden deposed : I was passenger by the ship Renfrewshire. I was a constable on board. I remember being battened down on the Bth November, under the main hatch. After I got on deck I saw the doctor standing on the hatchway. I heard him ask the young men to lift up the rest of the hatch. The captain told several of the married people that the reason why the hatches were battoned down was because of the appearance of the weather. The doctor was the worse for drink on that evening. The captain said in the cabin next morning that the doctor had made an apology for what ho had done, whioh the dootor ownod fco. CroHH-oxamincd by Mr Roes: I smelt the dootor'w breath, and know that ho was under fcho inlluonco of liquor. I have Boon him won eovoml occuwioriH. I have boon on very #ood terms wifch the dootor »inco ( leaving J?Jymaufch, except on one OCCttfIJWJ, Thl» closed Mi© cft«o for the defence. Mi? Jtee» hmo intinmtod that ho wi»hod to cftll norm rebutting ovidonco to that ov(tn on i\ia (i\mtfcm of fcbo doctor's inU/xUMUm on th« j%hfc of. the disturbance on \m*& &w yem\, W# then called >h)m Thomm Jhk, f/ho stated : I was noi »£ all into%\G®teA on ttwb night, I wm jttifa to ymiotrn my duty on that mining s«4 outing ttm whote voyage. &Foss>e%amlnG&~h? M* GomlotH. \ I am not e®rkin wheihw I ao% & bottte of bmndy irwn tiw atewsw4 tliafc night. The isjrtsifttitag&ily yrohSW&d me (mm having my 'lifiwr, William Oliver re-called : I can swear thai ihQ doctor had no drink that night. I wa« rittite cloae to him. CroijA-examined by Mr Oornford : It wan by hi« appearance that I judged the doctor wa« nofc drunk. Daniel St. John re-called : The doctor was not under the influence of liquor that evening. Mr Cotterill then addressed the Court for the defence. He remarked that the case had been put so fully before his Worship that it would be unnecessary for him to detain the Court for more than j five minutes. He then reviewed the evidence, contending that the captain's act in causing the hatcheß to be battened down on the night of the Bth November was a perfectly reasonable and proper one, considering the appearance of the weather. He characterised the doctor's conduct on the occasion as being altogether of a mutinous nature. He denied that any assault had been committed on plaintiff, and said that a claim of £100 damages in such a case was absolutely preposterous. Mr Rees then summed up at considerable length on behalf of the plaintiff. He commended his learned friend opposite for the brevity of his address, and also for the calm and impartial manner in which he had gone over the evidence. He referred to some remarks about Dr Dale that appeared in the Herald's leading article of that morning, and said it would be well, in future, if newspapers made no reference to cases that were pending before the Court, although he admitted the remarks complained of did not refer to the particular case now pending. He complimented both the Napier papers for the fairness and impartiality with which they had reported the present case. He submitted that while the captain had control of the ship, the medical man in charge had absolute control of the immigrants, and he was bound to see to their comfort, health, and cleanliness. He was there solely to look after the passengers, and to see that everything was done that was necessary for their health. Whether the present case fell through, or not, he thought the Bench would agree with him in these facts. He thought the action of defendant, in battening down 200 passengers on such a night as that referred to was an exercise of authority which no captain, except under extreme necessity, would venture to do. It was quite probable that, had the hatches not been removed, some of the immigrants might have died, and not merely fainted, from the effects of the' battening down, and the captain would then have been put on his trial for manslaughter. He pointed out that the whole of the witnesses on beth sjdes agreed in saying that all the hard and insulting words used, such as " scoundrel," " coward," and other epithets, came from the captain, and not from the doctor. He submitted that while in theory the doctor was under the captain, in practice he was not, and he therefore had the right to interfere with the arrangements of the ship so far, and so far only; as related to the safety and health of the persons under.his oharge. The doctor, by the captain's conduct, had been, seriously damaged, not only by the loss of hia professional reputation, but also by the discomfort and annoyance he had received on board the vessel. If the Bench considered plaintiff entitled to a verdict, he hoped his Worship would award him substantial damages. His Worship retired from the Bench for about fifteen minutes. On taking his seat again, he said that he had no hesitation whatever in giving a verdict in favor of defendant. He considered that the captain was perfectly justified in preventing the doctor from taking the hatches off on the night in question. It had been shown that the barometer had fallen to a large extent, and that, on the captain consulting his officer, they had decided on taking in certain light sails. On a further consultation taking place, it was determined to batten down the hatches. He could not believe Dr Dale's evidence that the captain was guilty of such an act of diabolical cruelty as to batten down the immigrants for the purpose of punishing them. It was admitted that the captain allowed the doctor to jgo down by the ventilator to see his patients. There was no doubt that at that moment a mutiny on board the ship was not far distant, and the captain was perfectly justified in endeavoring, at all risks, to uphold his authority. The captain's presence of mind on the occasion was fully shown by his statement that he refrained from exercising his authority, and acted for the best for the safety of his ship. The assault, if it could be called an assault, had arisen through the doctor's own conduct. As to the question of the doctor's intoxication, there was a good deal of conflicting evidence, several witnesses stating that he was perfectly sober. He thought that Dr Dale's evidence on that point was very much against himself. He said that he might have asked the steward to drink, but if he had it was done to promote peace and harmony. He thought that on such a night as the one in question it was absurd for the surgeon of a ship not to be able to say whether he had taken brandy with the steward or not. He could not find any excuse whatever for Dr Dale deliberately inciting a number of young men to resist the authority of the captain of a vessel, if the captain thought the precautions he was taking necessary for the safety of his ship. He thought there had been the nearest approach to mutiny on board that ship that could possibly have happened, and the captain's action was urgently needed on the occasion. He regretted very much having been compelled to say so much on this case. Judgment was given for defendant, witli costs £8 19s. ALLEGED LUNACY. Henry Hudson was brought up on remand, charged with being of unsound mind. His Worship told the prisoner that the medical certificate was to the effect that he was a sane man. He must take some steps to get work ; if he did not he would be prosecuted as a vagrant. The prisoner was an able-bodied man, and must go to work, instead of wandering about lighting fires in lanes and gullies. He would be

set at liberty, but an eye would be kept m him, and he would be at once arrested tf he was found roaming about. The prisoner was then discharged. "1 ALLEGED LABCEKY. ' Alice Smith was charged with stealing several articles of female underclothing the property of Sarah Light. Inspector Scully conducted the prosecution ; Mr Lee defended the prisoner. , Sarah Light deposed that she had been lodging with the prisoner's father for fourteen days. She missed a bag of dirty clothes, and asked the prisoner if she knew anything about it. Prisoner said she did not. Witness thought it might have been left in the cab, but the cabman said he had left everything perfectly safe at Mr Smith's house. Some of the articles were new ; the others, though old, were of use to witness. After missing the bag 'ai: clothes, she missed a new chemise. She had, taken it out of her box in the prisoner's presence, and when she missed it she suspected that the prisoner had taken it. Gave information to the police, caused a eoarch warrant to be issued, and had the house where prisoner lived with her father fiearohod. The articles produced, ? and which were those that witness had missed, were found at Smith'B house. .Witness valued thorn at £1. ■-.-■} The witness was cross-examined at considerable length by Mr Lee with respect to her term* of intimacy with a* man named Cranney, with the view of throwing discredit upon her testimony. The only point, however, which was elicited' as at all bearing upon the case, was that Cranney was sent to Smith's house for the luggage of the prosecutrix, and there was therefore the presumption open that the articles were merely left behind. j Constable Irwin deposed that he searched the house of' Smith.' The prisoner was washing at the time. Witnew found the articles produced. Some of them were on a bed, and looked as if they had just been washed ; others were in a box in a room which Smith said was occupied by the prisoner. Witness arrested the prisoner, and she said that the articles belonged to the prosecutrix, and that she had washed them as she did not like to see them dirty. ■',- His Worship said that there was an - element of uncertainty about the case that would not justify the prisoner being ~* convicted. There seemed to be no doubt that the articles belonged to the prosecutrix, but it was not equally clear that they had been stolen from her. She had left Smith's house in a hurry, and had not taken her luggage with her. Indeed, her arrangements altogether appeared to be o£ a mixed character. She had sent Cranney for her luggage, and it might be that he merely left behind the articles alleged to have been stolen. At all events there was so much of doubt about the affair that his Worship could not convict the prisoner. The prisoner was then discharged ; the artioles of clothing being given up to the proaecutrix. ■ = m