MAGISTRATE'S COURT.-Thursday.

New Zealand Herald, Volume IV, Issue 277, 1 October 1864, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT. -Thursday.

(Before Thomas Beekliam, Esq., It.M.) Dia'NKAims. Thomns Gibson, James black, Peter Ilealey, and Mary '"Warding, charged with tlio above olfence, were dealt with in tlui usual manner. ADKANK V. IIIiUUAY. Claim to recover the sum ot' £28 18s. 3d., for cash lont aiul sundries supplied. Mr. I! rook field appeared for plaintiff. 3S o appearance of defendant. Judgment lor full amount claimed mid costs. 1/VKKS V. J OI.KY. Claim to recover £2L -Is., for carting, and ea'.e of firewood. Mr. Hill for plaintilV. Defendant did not.appear. Judgment for plaintiil, with costs'. CHltlSTOl'lllill. V. ItKAItIIKX. Claim to recover £1 10s., for rent duo from dofondant. . No uppcaraneo of defendant, and judgniont lor plaintiff recorded. WATKIIS V. JIHKNNKH. Claim to recover £2 Is. 3d., for hoard and lodging. , £io appcarancc of defendant, and judgment obtained by plaintiff for amount elaimcd with costs. harrki.i. v. he i,i:o.v. Claim £2 2s. (id., for goods supplied. Defendant did not appear. Judgment i'or pl.-iinUll'. CON'ItOY v. IIAI.U Claim .C I 125., for work and la Lour done. Defendant did not appear. Judgment lor plaintiil', with c.i.*ts. M'ANJIUUW V. I'lS U.K. Claim to recover ;til, lor rent die . ' On the suggestion of liis Woi>,i-J;■, (ho parties 1 in the case settled t'jo matter out of Court.. r 11. HOATWItKJIIT V. LIKHT.-COJ.. J>ll IiVIXCr.Y. Claim to recover .t'2o Ba., for goods delivered and ' sold. J Mr. Beveridgo for plaintiff, und Mr. Wyr.il for defendant. Mr. Bevevidge applied for an adjournment, on (ho ground that his principal witness was not pvcu sunt. i Mr. Wynn objected to tho adjournment on the , grounds us being insufficient. t His Worship ruled that the loarned counsel for tho it plaintiff must cither proceed with the case or tako a i, non-suit. h Defendant deposed, that ]io had. given an order for :n iWsl slftlw! Mjrl tifey lewis ofill'SV 6 >dj

to Messrs. Rattray & Matheson. The bill sent in by tho plain till is nearly three times as much as the previous prices charged by Messrs. Rathay & Matheson. The price was 12s. per hundred. The stakes were delivered to Captain Pilling. The receipt produced is in his handwriting. I have not paid for them. There has beon no claim made against me by any other party for this amount. By Mr. Wynn : Mr. Boatwright is a boatman who Drought tho stakes.

By Mr. Beveridge : I offered to arbitrate in the matter and an offer Cor settlement to tho defendant provided I could be socured from all claim against mo by Rattray & Matheson. Plaintiff : I received an order from Mr. Gilmour, Rattray & Matlieson's clerk, for two thousand stakes, and nine loads of firewood. I delivered the timber according to order. The prices charged are fair and reasonable. I paid 10s. per hundred for tho stakes, and tho other 10s. I chargo for freight. I always get. half what tho stakes sells for in Auckland for freight, it I sold a load of firewood for £1, I should getJlOs. for freight. I consider 10s. is a fair freight. Defendant offered mo 7s. 6s. per hundred for°the stakes. By Mr. Wynn : A ton of firewood would take up more room than one hundred stakes. The defendant said if I would guarantee him against Rattray and MathcFon's claim, ho would pay me a reasonable price for t.liom. Tho rcceipt produced is the second I reciivjd. I got that bccauso Rattray & Matheson had stopped payment. This closed the case. His Worship ordered anonsuit- to bo recorded, remarking that the evidence went to prove that it was the estate of Rattray and Matheson that the plaintiff in this action must look for payment. Thero was nothing to prove the defendant was in anv wav liablo. oiuoa V. -KTELIAMS. Claim of £20 for damage dono to sheep belonsinir to the plaintiff. T. C. Williams deposed : I am the defendant in this action. I impounded a quantity of slicep belonging to tho plaintiff, in the public pound, Otahuliu. I as: ossed damages -.t 3d. per head. I instructed the poumtkeeper to rc,)ay the amount of tho damages. I impounded about 800 sheep By Mr. Bcvcridge: The sheep were on a farm that I leased at Mangarei. The sheep got through tho fence. Tho fence has three rails. Mr. Grigg was presont when I impounded the sheep. Mr. Grigg said he would pay tho fees if I impounded them at ouco.

By Mr. Wynn : The fence X speak of is a dividing fence between my land and Mr. Grieg's. I Cannot say when, or by wliom tho fenco was put up. Plaintiff, sworn : The defendant impounded a large number of Blieep of mine on the 25th September last. They were driven about two miles. They were in the pound from half-past 10 a.m. till 6 or 7 o'clock in the evening. Besides (he fees, tho damages fixed by the defendant was Is. I consider tlio claim of £20 made by me for injury done to the sheep is a fair and reasonable charge, including the damagps. I hud a conversation with Mr. Williams on the Mangarei road. I told him I would pay all that was due if he would impound the sheep. By Mr. Beveridgo : I certainly told Mr. Williams to take the sheep to tho pound. But I did not say I would pay hitn whatovor damages lie might choose to fix, ifhe would impound them at once. The sheep wero in thc'poimd from half-past ten till after dark the same day, ui d for that I plac3 6d per head damages.done. 1 6Wj;iv distinctly that I believe tlis fact ot' the sheep bt iag kept in a closely packed yard would depredate them in value at least 6d per head. I have given a promissory note for the amount of Pound-lees according to tho Act. I could have got them out at oneo it' I had chosen to ilo 80. I received the letter I now produce, which I hand to tho Court to be read. (The letter was here read, which was to tho effect that the sheep were impounded at the request of tho plaintiff, and the defendant considered that it was very " bad manners" to commence a claim against him for any injury his sheep may have sustained.) I received a letter from Mr. Spencer respecting the return of tho fees by Mr. Ilall, according to Mr. Williams'order to that effect. I told him I was willing to pay the pound-fees, if Mr. Williams would apologize to me for another matter.

By Mr. Wynn : I violc to Mr. Williams on Die same day of impounding. I instructed you to proceed some few days afterwards. I saw Mr. Spencer on the .Monthly, J think. X gave a promissory note toltho pound-keeper, which is the usual way of paylr.e.it. i'.y the Bench : If the si eo j had been simply impound etl for an hour or so ti . would have sustained hut little in jury. I am s( 1 ng some slitep of the same llock for 3.5s and some 245. I iode to Auckland and buck, to seek legal advice on the matter at issue, as soon as I heard of if, and released the sheep immediately upon my retinn. John Hall: iam Pound Keeper at Otaliuhu. I recollect the impounding of these sheep. I received a letter from the defendant:, which I now produce, which is to the effect that I was to return all cash to Sir. Grigg but Ihe fees paid, ns Mr. Williams liad given up all claim. I have served a notice accordingly this morning. The amount of promissory note is £11 lis. 7d., and is the gross amount of pound fees and damages. Thomas Spencer: On the Thursday morning, I took a message from Mr. Williams to Mr. Grigg to the effect that I had called in reference to the sheep, Sir. Williams had impounded, and that Mr. Williams would return the damages to him. The conditions were that Mr. Williams would write a written apology, and pay Mr. Grigg £5, and defray any expenses incurred. This closed the caso. Mr. Wynn, said, it was evident that the defendant had committed a gross and violent trespass, and the plaintiff was clearly entitled to tlio damages he claimed. 'Ihe Impounding Act, had not been put in by the learned counsel for the plaintiff, audit was therefore a simple matter of trespass, which Mr. Wynn, considered had been clearly proved. His Worship, said, that looking at the whole of the evideuce, the Court had no alternative but to give judgment for the plaintiff, for full amount claimed. ITEAHS V. IVIIXIAMS. There were two cases, against the defendant, which on the application of Mr. Russell, were adjourned till next week. WILLIAMSON' V. CIIUICKSHAJTK, SMART AM) CO. Claim to recover tho sum of £12 10s. for lithographic work dono. Mr. J. B. Kussoll, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Bovcridgo for tho defendant. William Wylio : I am a lithographer living at Pamure. I ordered some lithographing from the iVrw '/.eatander Office, subject to my approval. The article produced, is what I wanted printed, and it bears upon it tho name of Cruickshank and Smart. Tho price was agreed upon when I gave the order, £2 10s. a thousand, and live thousand were ordered. 1 do not know whether the goods have been delivered or not. I mado an offer to you to compromise) the matter, as I did not wish to appear in Court, and wished to settle tho matter without paying costs. 1 havo had a conversation with Cruickshank, Smart and (Jo., respecting tho affair. Mr. Smart told mo the goods had been delivered, but I have no proof of it. f 'his was not beforo tho present action wis biought. I received instructions irom Mr. Smart to get tho work done. I was not then in the employ of Mr.

YlU'ty ftS lithographer. I. was not in business on my own account at that time. I wrote a letter, which I now produce, on tlio mutter, to the propiietor ot tho Xetc-Zcnldiuh r. r 't'he letter was here read by the clerk to tli. K i i i. n'lnch was to the effect that the witncSi hint ii'-V'-r j<i\ •i: tho proprietor instiuctions to whom i ' ilelivw th>- —the delivery had not taken place. anil t li■ • wirn. -- refused therefore to pay the sum o: '-l- i l - e'.;- by him.] -I took the order under '■■ that Ji was to do the work mysuir, and Clc Mmuld have been delivered to me. Robert Arnold: 1 ..in a liLhogniphor in tho employ iof tho Nav-iCmlander ollieo. I remember the last wit ne.-s giving orders fur some lithographing work. The pattern produced is what ho ordered. JJuriug thu progress of tho work Mr. Wylio saw it, and seemed satislied with it. £1 10s. per thousand was tho prico agreed upon, and five thousand were ordered. Bv Mr. Boveridgo: Wylio asked for an estimate for a label, but said it was for Cruickshank, Smart and Co. Wylio never told me ho wis going to commence business on his own account. Ho showed me tho name on the label. The name of Cruickshank, Smart, and Co. was in the centre of the lain 1. H added tho words for Cruickshank, rfmart and C and it was distinctly upon the understanding £h t tbe work was for Cruickshank and Co. that wouik. riook the job. I swear ho mentioned Cruickshank, S nart and Co.'a names twice. A. boy was in tbe oftice a", tho time. By Mr. Russell: I heard Wylio mention in your oflicelust Thursday, thut Cruickehmik Smart wld CO. hftit lu.'k psvitl hhfli

Wni. Wylie re-callcd by Mr. Beveridgc : MkSmurt gave mo tbe order. I made no statement at? tlie time as to my doing the labor myself. He spoke' at out the probable cost. I said I could not do it, and! it would cost about £3 per thousand. I said the' work -was to be done for myself. James Smart: lam one of the defendants in this action. I gave Mr. Wylie instructions to do the ■work of lithography; he was to do the work himself. I never authorised him to employ the plaintiff. By Mr. Kussell: 1' did not know that Mr. Wylie was is Mr. Varty's employment at the time. I have received the goods. It was immaterial to Jne •who did the work. Wylie had not claimed for the work prior to this action. I have allowed him for it. We keep an account in our books with him. Since the goods have beon received I have credited him with some amounts. I cannot say without reference to the books whether I have received money from Air. Wylie since that time Ido not keep the cash book. I cannot swear to these questions until I see my books. The account is now squared off between us. Mr. Russell raised a point of law in order to endeavour to prove that Mr. Wylie was acting as the agent for Cruickshank Smart and Co., the defendants in this action, and that therefore, the plaintiff had a perfect right to choose his mark to whom ho might charge the work. Tho evidence was very clear that the work was'done for the defendants, and they were clearly responsible. Mr. Beveridge said it was not sufficient for Mr. Wylie to simply verbally state that the work was required for Cruickshank Smart and Co., the agency must be first established, and there was no evideuce that Wylie had authority from the defendant to act as tlicir agent. His Worship statau that ho would consider tho case, and give judgment next Thursday. rrrz<iEKALV> v. hales. No appoariinco. Case struck off the list. Tl" e Court hero adjourned for a quarter of an hour. On His Worship resuming his seat, the foil >wing case came on for hearing. KOPEK V. TUCK AXI) SMITH. Claim of £'rJ, f»r damages done by the conversion of a certain box Ntored at the defendant's. The sum of £o 17s. v;:s piid into Court and a set-off filed by tho defendants. Mr. Brookficld appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Davis for the defence. Mr. Brook field stilted that the contents of the box wero principally composed of carpenter's tools, a little clothing. mid a few books, and some bachelor's requisites, in tin- shape of needles, cotton, &c., &c. Wm. Henry Smith: I am one of the defendants in this case. In October, lSfiU, 1 was carrying on business with Mr. Tuck. We kept an office and a store attache '. We had a large board placed conspicuously in ( office, on which was stated the terms upon which «i: nero desirous of storing goods. A dissolution took placo some three months ago between myself and invite 'ite partner, and lam now unable to produce the not ce in question. I have looked for the notice. 1 i'u..>oinber the plaintiff in October, 1863, leaving some gnods with us. I stated to the plaintiff the terms upon which we would accept the storage. Tho terms were that we would take into storage passengers' boxes, &c., &c., at 4d. per week per bos. We told him distinctly that three months was the length of tho period we allowed him. At the expiration of which time a notice would be required. If no such notice was received, the box would bo advertised and sold, 14 days' notice being given. On the 22nd of February he paid the storage then due. I did not see him again for three months. I inserted an advertisement in accordance with the notice.

Mr. Brookfielil submitted that an advertisement in a newspaper was no evidence whatever. The original order for that advertisement must he produced, as well to prove the advertisement. JUr. Dans said he could not produce the required document. lie-examined by Mr. Davis : The notice in our our oitico statsd that the advertisement should be inserted in the public papers. (A copy of the Southern Cross, of July 2nd, 1864, -was here produced, and the wit'w-ss pointed out the advertisement in question in that newspaper.) The goods were sold J)y Messrs. ladings and Dowden on the 16th of July. The name of the owner, I believe, was written on the lid of tin; box. lam not certain whether my partner opened the box or the auctioneer. The goods were sold for £6 13-i. I never received goods upon any other terms, excepting these which I have> stated. The amount of my claim for storage at the time the Roods were sold was 65., auctioneers' charges and advertisement amounted to 10s. Bv Mr. \Vvnn : I did not know the contents of the box. I will swear that I never told you in your ollice that I had remonstrated with Tuck about selling tho box. I told the plaintiff that the charge would he 4d. per week per box, and that they would be advertised and sold for the storage due. I will swear the thing I hold in mv hand, called the Southern Cross newspaper, is a public paper. The pnblic in general read this newspaper. I cannot say whether it is sent gratis or not. X read it my6elf, and therefore I consider it is a public print. X will not swear that Mr. Roper ever saw it. It was also inserted in the Tlkhatai. The plaintiff paid the money to me. I will swear Tuck wa3 not present, and the plaintiff flid not see Tuck on that occasion. There was no one present besides myself and Roper. Possibly the plaintill : may have mentioned that he would be absent from Auckland for six or nine months. It. is possible lie

might have asked me if the box would lie safe during that time. I did not tell him it would be all right. The terms were hung up on the door in a position that they might be seen. By the Bench: X was not present at the sale of the box.

Henri- Tuck: lam one of the defendants in the case. We had a written list of the terms upon which we were in a position to store jjooUb. The card was placed on the door so that it might be seen bv anybody.. I was not present when the plaintiff left the box for storage. Mr. Smith and I have dissolved partnership. I made diligent search on Saturday for the notice, but without success. [The witness here corroborated the testimony of the laat witness, respecting the terms of the storage.] I did not see the plaintiff on the 22nd of February, when he came to pay the storage. By our joint direction, in consequence of the dissolution, the box was sent for sale. Ido not know the contents of the box. I

was not present when the bos was sold, but I saw it after it was sold. We never received goods on anyother terras but tliose I liave mentioned. I did not see or hear from the plaintiff between the 22nd of February and the time the goods were sold. The copy from which tlio advertisement was printed, which I hold in my hand, is the original draft, and is in my handwriting. The advertisement in the Southern Cross is a copy of the origiual. JJy Mr. Brookfield: I will swear that this is a copy of the original draft. X searched the office yesterday, amongst, my psvpnrs, for the notice. I hare given a correct description of what is on the card of notice. It was our custom to sell at the immediate elapse of the fortnight's notice. Henry Baker : I am employed by Messrs. Ridings and Dowden. I remember some goods being sent by Tuck and Smith for sale, on the 16th of July last. The boxes wore opened before they wero sold, I saw the contents of them. There was a box containing carpenters' and engineers' tools amongst them. I was present at the sale. I know that the box in question, i'ctehei J-G 135., which X consider a fair and reasonable price. Br Mr. Brookfield: I cannot say whether it was Mr.Ropcr's box or not; but I remember it because it was the only box of tools that was sold on that Jay. I have had experience in these matters from having been employed in the sale room. I cannot say whether there were any hand hammers in the box. Sccond-hand hand hummers fetch sometimes 1(1., 2d. and 3d. The lid of the box was opened, and the goods and box wore sold in a lump. > George Staines i I was at Hidings and s sale on the 10tl\ July last. I purchased two or three boxes on that day ; one contained tools. I bought 01le —7 —which contained tools, for £6 13s. The box contained some old blacksmiths and -CArpenten> lools ; some musty clothes, and very old fashioned. There was no tool porfect in the box. I consider the fair value of the box was about the price I gave for it. I3v Mr. Brookfield : I tun. a general dealer. air. Brookfield said ho was entitled to a verdict for the plaintiff. An advertisement in the Southern Cross Mid New Zealand Herald was not a public advertisement, though there was no doubt but tl.a L .some pecp o read tl oje publications. He trusiei his Wi l'ihip woidd also consider the unseemly haste with vrhich the box was hurried off for sale. The fourteen days, moreover, according to their own evidei c ■, hi-d not expired on the day of sale. . Kis Worship cited a case in point to prove that tue firat and last days were not reckoned by law, aJid remarked that the notice of terms in question stated that AjfrSH fourteen toys the -wswW ,oc esiffl;

whereas it liad been proved that the box in question had been sold within that time. Thomas Roper deposed : I am .a blacksmith. 1 rcrollect leaving a box with the defendant!;, -tv 1 ® a list I made of the contents of the box which I hold in mv hand. Tho prices in the li'it aio the prices I paid for the articles in England. Jhe screw cutting appai atus cost mo £5 at home. I had it about three months previously, but did not use it much. Jt was in good repair and working order. 1 consider £5 is a reasonable price. I could not get one here for that price. I made this list as I pncKcd the box. Tho terms feed are fair and reasonable prices. Tho tools were all paclifd and complete when I put them in the store. I did not have them m use between tho time of my packing them in England and the time I left them at the store. The nett value cf the tools and clothing in the box amount to ■--- and the books are worth £1. jjy Mr. Davis : I made out the list myself. I will g-r/ear the prices I have put o) posite them are the cost I paid in England. The tools were all greased with tallow, and therefore the sea-water would not injure them. I never tried to prof ure any of tho; tools in Auckland. I will swear fho tools were worth £29 when I left them with tho defendants. By Mr. Brookfield : I am certain all tho things mentioned in this list were in tho box when I left it at-the store. , By tho Bench : Everything was new oxceptmg tho screw-cutter and ono or two other articles. His "Worship remarked that in looking at the evidence it showed that the defendants adopted a most summary mode of transacting business. -By this plan goods amounting to several limidrtds of pounds might be sold without even taking an inventory of the contents. It liad also been proved that the box had been sold within the time of fourteen days. Judgment must of course be given for plaintiff. and the amount woxild be announced next woek.

Js. C. TICKERS V. S. C. a. TATES. Claim for £12 175., for damage done to, and hire of dog-cart. Mr. Brookfield appeared for plaintiff. Plaintifr said : I remember a dog-cart which defendant bad obtained from my son. Tlie defendant ■was to have it on hire. Anne Elizabeth Crisp Tickers : Tho defendantcame to our house about the dog-cart, and I saw hiin. He said lie had brought the cart out, and I told him he could tale it back again. I told him the cart belonged to my nephew. I said if lie took it, it must be iipon his own responsibility, and his answer was, "Very well; I cannot do without it." By the defendant: I told you I would not give you leave to take tlie cart. I never said, I suppose you must take it. Samuel Crisp Tickers: I am plaintiff in this action. I remember my father borrowing a dog-cart from me on the 29th April last, for Mr. Yates. It was to be returned on the Ist May. I did not get- it back till the 27th of May. I sustained a loss by not having the use of the dog-cart. I was using another dogcart, and had to keep it until I got the one back the defendant was using, in consequence of which I lost the sale of the dog-cart. I have since sold tho dog-cart for £20, whereas I' was previously offered £30 for it, so that I have lost £10 by the detention. I had to send to the ' Harp of Erin' for the dog-cart on the 27th, when I got possession of it. The cart was much damaged—most of the bottom was out. The splinter-bar was gone entirely, and one of the springs broken. I paid £2 7s. 6d. for repairs. Tlie cart was in good condition when the defendant got it. I paid 10s. to the man for fetching it from tho ' Harp of Erin.' By the defendant: I sold the cart to my brother-in-law Mr. Poulton: lam a coach-builder. X rccollcct Mr. Vickers bringing a dog-cart for repairing to my shop. I repaired the cart, and charged £2 7s. Gd. for my work. The bottom was nearly broken, the splinter-bar gone, and also one of tho springs. Thomas J. Kobinson : I am a store-keeper residing at Penrose. In Maj- last I was living at Olahulm. I was instructed by Mr. Tickers to fetch a dog-cart from the Harp of Erin. I did so, and found tho splinter-bar gone altogether, one of tho springs gone, and the bottom nearly out. By the defendant: I married Mr. Tickers' wifo's sister. Mr. Tickers paid me 10s. for my work. Mr. Yickcrs, senr., recalled : I found implements and working materials on my farm. You are taking caTe of my farm. The bottom of the dog-cart was broken, and I told you it would not cany a heavy load. The re Is were in a very bad condition. I lent you the cart for a few days. This closed the caso. The defendant said he had no witnesses to call, and stated that the cart had been lent to him by the father of the plaintiff upon the understanding that he would take up two loads to the farm. The roads ■were in a very bad state, and he made all due haste. He admitted there was some damage done to the cart. He did not know Mr. Tickers, jun., in the transaction at- all. He believed the statement of the non-sale of the cart was untrue. His "Worship remarked that the defendant's own coincided in a great measure with tho plaintiff's claim. He should give judgment for £12. There were a number of other cases set down for hearing, which were adjourned till next week. rnrn.vY. DRUNKENNESS. James Murray, William Danacrfield, Susan Downing, Jeremiah Coglan, and James Heaton, charged •with the above offence, were dealt with in tho usual maimer. CITY ItATES. William "Walter, £10 10s, in which judgment was given last "Wednesday, was paid into Court. Ellen Maddox, £2 7s, confessed judgment. Time was allowed for payment till this day fortnight. George Gilmour, £1. The defendant stated that he had never received any notice, and had no opportunity to appeal. He was a weekly tenant, and, moreover, at the date of the time the rate was struck he was not in the Province of Auckland. The Secretary again appeared as represent at i vr tho City Board, and being sworn deposed: Tho do :ument which 1 hold in my hand is my authority for acting in this matter. It is signed by tho Chairman and duly sealed.

J. Diddams: I am rate-collector to the City Board. I produce the Rate-book, and find defendant's name, —the description of property is a wood building in Nelson-streeot, assessed for £1. JJscrved a notice dated 7th Juno last, and left it at his residence. I first demanded the sum from some female I saw there. I produce the rate-roll with the signature of i the Chairman and other members of the Board. Tho amount claimed has never been paid. By the defendant: I left the notice at your house in Nelson-street. Defendant, sworn, deposed : I gave up the fcouso :'OT which I am assessed in February last, and till the end of April I -was out of the Province of Auckland, and even during the time I inhabited tho house I was a -weekly tenant only. By Mr. Ogilvie: I was in Auckland in tho month of June. I now live in Stati'ord-streeet. His Worship observed that the Act stated that if the notice in question was loft at tho last known place of abode of defendant, it was a legally served notice. The defendant's name appeared on the rateroll, he should, therefore, give judgment for plaintiff, ■with costs. bheach or iMroTCSDncc act. Joseph Halter, was charged, with allowing a horse to Btray at large, contrary to the Act made and proTided. Defendant did not appear, fined 40s. and costs. Robert Stone, fined in the same manner. Richard Carter, charged with allowing two cows to # stray in Grafton Road, 40s. and costs. John Davis, two cows, in Victoria Quadrant, 40s. and costs. Jchn Me Guilay, -10s. and costs. Michae] Ryan, seven cows in Stanley-street, 40s. and costs Archibald Scott, summons not served. Peter Grace, charged with two offences, was fined 40s. and costs, in eacli case. ASSAULT. Peter Dowle was brought up charged, with an assault, on board tho ' Albatross,' on the 10th of September last, to one Peter Wilson, by striking him ■with liis hands on the face. The prisoner, pleaded not guilty. Mr. Brooklleld appeared for the informant, and • Mr. Bevcridge for the accused. Peter Wilson, I am cook and steward on beard the ' Albatross.' I was on board on the lOtli of September. The defendant who is mate of the vessel ■was on board also. • The 1 Albatross ' had started on the 10th for Tauranga. After we were, on the way. The prisoner forcibly entered the galley and assaulted me. Ho seized me by the throat, and struck me in several places on the body, and also on the face. He broke my watcli chain. It was broken in tho struggle caused by the prisoner entering the gidley. I gave lain no provocation that I kuew of.

Bv Mr. Bevcridge: I am- cook and steward on board. I never understood that the mate had am rialit toentcr the gallev. . "Mr "Wvnii here obsemd thattho learned counsel had not pleaded justification, and therefore, had no right- to n?k (he question. Mr. Bcvcridge suhinittfd (hat the question vtus a perfectly correct one. Examination resumed : The mate gave me seine orders, which I obeyed, [all the witnesses in the ease, were here ordered out of the Court]. Tlicordeis were to clean out two bunks in the cabm for two •passengers. I replied, "Where am Ito put tlie cliches and things in the bunlc," which!used as a sort of pantrv. could not. do the work he (old me then, and I had to get the dinner ready. I suppose it amis two or three hours before X cleaned the hunks on The mate was forward at the galley at the time he gave me the orders. T told him I would not clean the bunks out until I knew where to put the tlislirs. and I afterwards told the captain I would not obe\ the mate's orders, but I would the captain s. About fifteen to tweiitv minutes elapsed between the oreieis and the assault." Ho abused me and useci mcsfijis"usting language, lie never said ain filing about bunks when he committed the assault. 1 nevey mentioned to the captain that the mate had struct

D 1 lie-examined by Mr. Brookfield: It-was after the assault was committed that 1 told the captain. i would not obey tlic mate's orders. I gave the prisoner no provocation whatever, excepting what have stated. -in, Kicholus King : I am n seamnn on home tlu Albatross. I know tl.o prosecutor. I rccol eel a scuffle taking place on the iOth of September between him and the mate. r lhe scuffle tool; place in the "alley. I parted them, and brought the mate omside The gallev. I heard no conversation pass at the time. I* did hear some orders given about some bunks, but Ido not know what they were. J also heard prosecutor Hint lie would not do it. Ihc orders given took place twenty minutes hemic the assault took place. Bv Mr. Beveiidge: I conld r.ot say whether .he steward had hold of the mate. I went in immediately after the mute.

This closed the case for the prosecution. James Braund: 1 am master of the 'Albatross. On the 10th of September last 1 was on the quartcrdeck, when 1 heard a scuflle in the galley. 1 went, to see what it was about. 1 spoke to the mate hr.-t, he. told me tlio steward roiused to obev orders, and ha;' told him to do it himself. Ihe steward told me bo would not do th; t the mate told him to do ; he did not consider himself under the mate at all. I told him if that was He case he was of no use on boaid the vessel. .1 he steward made no complaint (o me about being struck. Uc did not appear injured in the least. By Mr. Brookfield: 1 did not see the seunk". The steward was a little excited. This was the only witness for 1 the defence. 11 is "Worship remarked that, an assault bad evidently be n committed, but great provocation had been given bv the prosecutor, who was ciide'iitb. very insubordinate man. jSo man had a right to take the law into his own hands, more especially olliccrs on their men. He should fine tlie accusid m the sum of 10s. and costs, and strongly advised the steward to be more obedient for tlic future. ASSAULTS. The case brought by Mary Gardner against Bicliard Hast, and by Ki chard East ngamst Mary Gardner, were arranged out. of Court.