THE COURTS.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume 24, Issue 1270, 31 March 1894, Page 3

THE COURTS.

MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HYDE: TnEsrrAy.-MAKCH 20. (BSfORK S. M. CALGUKiSH, Esq., S.M.j Maria Co-molly; v. B: GftHam'.—Claim, 15s 2d. reserved. .. ~ame v. H. Lippert. S. W. Lodge, diii P: Ream. Claim, £7 17s 6d.—Judgment reserved, . ; H. Bv ..Connolly v: TtioS: Dowlirig; Patrick Howling," and Htgo Lippert.— Cluim, £lO. —Judgment reserved. C. E. Griffei v. Thoa. Stanley:—Claim', £23.—Judgment for plaintiff for £3, uiid costs: Wardens''cbtfßT, hyde.' Tuesday, 20th March, 1894: Before S. M. Dau;leis : i/, Esq - ., Wakdkn: j Harry A. W. Mead.—Rcsidc'n'ee area:— Grunted. . . ■-. ■,> Sen YcW and' Jiht Ben'.— T» it -face'.— Grantid. ... Same.'—WaW^ni'cc.— Granted. •Same:—-Extended Claim.- Granted: Same. —Dam. —(: ranted. ' . o _ MAGISTRATE'S COURT; Wednesday, Mabcii 28. BefokkS. M. Dalclei.su, Esq., S. M. KWel.y Pastoral Coy. v. Mathewso;:. ~ Illegafly driving sheep through Kwehurn run wttnout pormhsion.— Adjourned for a month. . .

;;Po!lce v. D. C. White:—Charged with having an unregistered, rlog in |,i* posscMißiu —As ilic.dog.had. been restored since the

J service of the summons, the police withdrew the charge 6u payment of 5s costs of court. Police y. W. Guffie.—Charged with allowing a cow "to wander at large within the poroiigh.T—Mr Ihde'r, for defendant, pleaded " Guilty," and the usual fine of-2s 6d and 7s costs, was imposed'.. Police v. vV. R. George. defendant was. charged under the Police Offences Act, 188*,. with IW-he dfd on March, lS9f," unlawfully disturb a public meeting which was. being held. aV the Town Hall, Naseby. . Sergeant Green conducted the case for the police, and Mr.lnder appeared for accused, who pleaded, " Hoi Guiky." : 1 In opening the case, the Sergeant said the particulars were briefly., that on. the evening in Question the Temperance party held a meeting in. the. Town Hall, to discuss the subject of Prohibition, no charge being made tor. admission... The .hall was crowded, half of the audience Being .ladies. Before commencing tlie meeting, Mr Malcolm, on behalf of the Temp'eran'c.e party, asked knyone who wished "to speak on the subject to send up their names, nind they 'could have £'!, opportunity of speaking from the platform. Several gentlemen accordingly sent up their "names. The "Rev. Mr Smith, as chairman, opened the proceedings; and from .the commencement of the tweeting and nearly all th'rbugn there were noises, interjection's, and ejaculations, sonie of -them ! )eiD s.,..T er y impertinent. When these interruptions were made a. crowd .'of young men laughed and .hooted, and. at tinies prevented .the speakers from being heard. B'°t& the'Qhairman : and Mr jja'd'er"'remonstrated:, and asked : the audience to give the speakers Va, fair -hearing.- The defendant, who.was standing near the back of the hall, shouted and yelled. He (the sergeant) asKed hJ m . to. stop or go outside; anil eventually put hiiii out, but; he ; came back again. He used ,i'uch^expressions, as.': V.Sh.ut, up;! " '-V.Sitdown:;! ''.'•'.Give someone dse a chance !" The proceedings had not been instituted on behalf of the Prohibition party, but he wished to put a stop to this sort of thing at public meetings. It was stated that there were two .other charges of a similiar nature, but the d'efeu;<lants preferred that the charges should be Heard separately. . The Rev. J. M'CosH Smith, Presbyterian M inister_ at Naseby deposed : He acted as chairman at the meeting in question; which was somewhat disorderly owing to the action of a few individuals. There was frequently sufficient interruption to prevent the speakers Being distinctly heafcd. He asked t-K'e audience to keep quiet. -- He thought Mr George interjected freijdetitly. There' were strong expressions of dissent; and noises which paused the younger, people to laugh. He thought the noises interfered with the progress of the meeting. Croßß-eSainined By Air Inder i He mentioned from his pulpit the previous Simday that the public were invited to attend. He had conducted meetings very often, ami at tedded a" good liuriiber of political meetings. LUring t-He interruptions nobody could hear. That was Mis dpiiiion. The interruption was caused.b£ a suiall vojee ringing through t S hall, which made btners.huigh. It was therefore hard to speak. -"•'•' To the .-tergeant: He was dii the lalform, add lidarer the Speakers than the audience. To His Worship : The meeting lasted a long time, till uearly 10 o'clock: The interruptions might not have lasted iiiore than a .minute at a tinje. James P. Malcolm; schoolteacher; was in the hall ihe meeting" in question was being held: When he. asked all who wished to speak to send in. their names, several of those opposed to Prohibition did so. Towards the close of. the chairrifati's remarks there was some interruption. Mr Kirby followed and there was a good dial of noise, and he recognised George as being one of the authors of it. While speaking himself George said something about " What have you got to do with it," and made other remarks which actually stopped Him from delivering what he intended to say. Some speakers got a ,/ood hearing, and others got none. - . ' ',

In cross-examination he said he: thought the longest noise would be for three minutes. The speakers would, not have been heara if they continued. He thought there was mere interruption than is usual at a political meeting. He had known;-meetings to be stopped for a quarter of an. hour. James Kirby, bootmaker, said he recognised George as causing some or the disturbance at the meetimr on the 20th. While Mr Malcolm was speaking it was not possible te hear wh.it he s id.

Crois-examined : He was watching Geerge and others making a noise. Wksn Mr Malcolm was speaking George interjected with questions, which stopped his address. Sergeant Henry Green gave evidence to the effect that when defendant was making the interruption he told him to desist, and as he did not do so he put him out. He came back again and continued his disturbances, but he (the sergeant) could not put hiiii oiit again on account of the crowd;

t .Cross-examined': He knew which aides the speakers represented. He summoned the Prohibition speakers as witnesses because they had been most interfered with. There was continual interruptions all through. "Constable Johnston gave corroborative evidence;

Mr Iridef said before calling evidence he thought he ediild satisfy the court that there was no necessity to go on with the case. Interruptions of approval or dissent were usual at sdcH meetings. The only effect it appareritlyHid was tointerrupt the thought* of th'eapeakers.. THere ifiaa no evidence to show that Cieorge created ii disturbance. If he was brought tip only fbV expressing dissent all those who expressed also should have been brought before the court. Iu the case of Clifford "v. Brafi'dori, where an audience hissed the actors of the, stage, the judge decided that it was no' offence if the audience expressed approval or disapproval. His Worship decided to hear the evidence for the defence.

H. Wilson, County Clerk 1 ; fiatt Attended a good many political meetings both in Scotlaud and New Zealand.. With the exception of occasional revelarit. interruption's he could not. say he. considered the meeting was disturbed. He beard George's remarks, and could riot siy he approved of tlieni. In cross examination he said the meeting would havei been disturbed if it Had been a religious one, but considering it was a political meeting there was" nothing unusual. He considered the remarks passed did harm to the object of the meeting. N. P. Hjorring, draper, deposed he was Mayor of Nasob'y, and had often taken the chair at politfcal meetings for 14 years. He ] was sitting' at the back of the hall, and heard 11 the speeches. He heard remarks of disapproval and app. use. The meeting was not more rowdy than political meetings usually are. When the speakers were in accord with the general body of the audience there was no e.xpression of disapproval. In cross-examination he said he had seen u bit of noise at. meetings he presided over, but never had any difficulty in; stopping it. R. F. Imler, auctioneer,- said he had presided over many temi-public meetings and had attended a number of public meetings, and saw no exceptional noise at the meeting in question.

Jas. Mitchell, builder, deposed he was at the nitei iug for a few minutes anil it, wasorderly during thai timel Mr Inder said uucnrd ng o the evidence of unbiassed people, who were men of standing and experience, the ease should not have been' brought into court. He thought .it was a t.ad stroke ot policy on the pari of those who 'interrupted, but they did nothing more than was usual at- such meetings When they heard remarks from the stage whiuh reflected on the trade in an unfair manner they exposed their .dissent... The. police attempted to connect the general noise with ihe. remarks nm.tc l.y lirorge, but because lie made a remark and the people lnughod h 6 could not bo said to disturb tho meeting. , SergCi-iit Green said it was'much the unu.-l thiug which took place at public meetings, but it should lie stopped. If it was allowed in other places that was nor to say it should be allowed here. .Tho papers n Other places often ccSinmcntod'on it.

His Worship said he would hear the other two charges before giving a decision. Stephen Stevens, tailor, and T. J. Ferguson, hotelkeepdr, were .charged with sinu» lar offences. . .

The evidence in both cases was pretty ninoh the same as in the previous case. In summing up His Worship said it was the usual thing for.people to express their approval or disapproval al political niee't iugs. While commending the Police for trying to put down disturbances, he thought tho evidence showed that there was uo more-noise or interruption than, might be expecu-d at a meeting of the kiud. He would therefore dismiss the cases. % . ■

R. F. luder v. G. Bottlng.—Adjourned till next "court day. , . , . Jauies Dawson; "V. S. Jacob. till next court day. W. R. George v. Gen Lung. —Claim £2 10s. —Judgment for amc-iint claimed, half In be pxtid at once, and the other half in a. month. Failing which five day's imprisonment in the Saseby goaf. __ ■ • Maisey v.. "plunie.—Claim- i'Os, cost of Suramdris. .—Judgment for amount claimed. R. and JV. Inder v. Ah Hea.—Claim, £8 16e 6d.—Adjourned for proof of service. ~ S. Inder v. £ls on ai L X). .U. (the amount was due for hoard and .lodging, and . feed for three horses, ari«i about 30 dogs).—Mr luder for plaintiff, and Mr ll'Carthy for defendant.—After hearing the evideuce, His Worship reserved his decision.

warden's Court, naseby.

F&Bat, MAfccH 36.

;Bef6k£§. M. DAtGLiESH, Esq., WaSd^k".)

. Angus M'Neiri.-Extended claim. Main Giillv. Oblected tpby Loch Can and Ah Dye-Adjourned on the application of defendant's, solicitor HJorrlnjr y. Grayson.—Friendly suit fornon renewal offoUrwaternirhts.—As the licenses had'not been renewed for two or three years, His Worsnip inflicted a flee ol 10s m each case.

Magistrate's court, na'seby.

Friday, March 30.

[Before S. Mead Dalgliesh, Esq., &.M )

, Herlihy v. Francis.—The particulars of this Case appeared .in our issue of the 22ud inst.

His.Worship delivered judgment as follows:- • . Apparently the question for the court to decide is whether the bargain made between plaintiff arid defendant was for six bullocks, selected at the time the bargain was made, or for the pick of six to be taken as wanted. The only evidence for the plaintiff -g his own,.and I must sav his memory appears somewhat defective. He does not remeuit.er when the one or the tico were taken away; neither does he remember when the red and white one (the subject of this dispute) died, arid although he is supposed to have seen Ladd on the cUv, he forgot to tell him of its death, and he did not write or intimate the fact in any way to defendant. He thinks, but is not/uf/w sure, that he told hisson which cottle were to be taken awav, but his son was not put into the box to bear that out. Readmitted that he had on otheroccasionstransactions similar to this... For the defendant we have the evidence of Francis wild swears positively that he did not select six bullocks on the day the hargnin was made, bfltthAtjbe was. to, pick them as he required Miem J, s-jid that", practically, that agreement was out-. .On no occasion did plaintiff or anvone oh his bthilf pick,or assist in picking the animals ; and he produced his memorandum book with an entrv corroborative of such a'bargain having been made : and further, that such a custom is usual, and that he has had similar transactions with others. Chas. Ladd entirely corroborated the defendant as to picking the cattle without interference by plaintiff or his son, excepting the hpifer which plaintiff did point out, but there is no dispute regarding it., E. Jlar.-Jin gave evidence as to the custom of picking cattle when taking them away, and that he had had transactions of t he same nature with plaintiff. There is no question at issue as to the law of the matter, and I must hold that the weight.of evidence is entirely in favour of defendant. Judgment .for amount paid into court, £3B 10s ; cost* o,f court, 6s; professional fee, £1 Is; one witness's expenses, Bs., t . ... .-. Bottingand.lk>ry y. Wljite.—Claim, £*l Ss lid: Defendant .paid, £l4 prior to hearing and disputed the balance,. amount was for an i, .9. U. and interestdue thereon.—His Worship said in face of the evidence he,could not allow the claim,, for interest. Both defendant's and his was to the effect that up. interest was to be charged, on the first promissory nojte, and,the second wa§ signed for plaintiffs o» n convenience:. He would give judgment for £1 10s 7d in addition to the amount already paid into court, and costs £1 ss: .

.Inder v: Harrison-.—.ln. giving judgment His Worship said the I. O. U. was given as an acknowledgment of the debt, and he would give judgment for amount claimed; with costs of court £2 15s, S4s for mileage, and professional fee £1 la.

Smith v. M'Clusky.—This.case was again adjourned on the application IMr Indei-: