LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXIII, Issue 7647, 26 May 1886, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

DISTRICT COURT.—Tctesdat, [Before Mr. H. G. &eth Smith, R.M.] Judgments for Plaintiffs.—S. JET. MoArthur v. T. H. Locke, claim £44 12s 9d, for goods supplied : Judguiant for the amount, and £4 13a costs. Ilesketh and Aitken v. i\ G. Bray, claim £26 11s Bd, for goods supplied: Judgment for the plaintiff, with £4 16s costs. Walkee v. Meade and Meade v. Wai.kek.—Hie Honor, in giving judgment, entered into the details of the two cases, giving judgment in the first for a balance of £36 14s. In the cross action, in which damages were claimed by reason of defendant failing to fulfil an agreement to grant plaintiff a lease, His Honor said in the absence of any binding agreement or settled arrangement plaintiff could not claim damages for any part of the claim. Judgment for defendant in that oase, and for £36 Ha in that of Walker v. Meade; costs in the first case £4 11s, and £3 2s in the second case, Meade v. Walker. Patterson and McLeod v. W. A. N. Pitt.—Mr. Clayton (for Mr. Heaketh) for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Theo. Cooper for the defendant. The claim was for £67 103 6d on a bill of exchange, and the defence was that the defendant, Major Pitt, had passed through the Bankruptcy Court since this bill was signed, and that the bill was also barred by the statute of limitations. Mr. Clayton called the defendant, who admitted that the bill of exchange was signed by him, and had not been paid. His defence was as above mentioned. In reply to Mr. Cooper, he said the bill was signed sixteen years ago, and this was the first time any claim had been made upon him for it. The debt was provable under his bankruptcy. The solicitors against him in the case were Messrs. Smith, Chapman, and Co., Dunedin, the successors of Messrs. Smith, Anderson, and Co., who acted for him in his bankruptcy, and obtained hie order of disoharge. Mr. Cooper characterised the action as an attempt to obtain the money by throwing dirt upon the defendant, in making him state in open Court that he bad been a bankrupt. Mr. Clayton eaid he was simply acting under instructions. He knew nothing naore about the case. Mr. Cooper aeked for judgment, and that the defendant be allowed his cos is. Judgment for the defendant, with £91 7b costa. Another action by the same parties, and similarly represented, was then heard, the claim being for £49 17a lid, for goods gold and delivered. The defence was the same as in the last case. The debt was contracted in 1869 and 1870. Judgment for defendant, with £3 7a costs. Several defended cases were adjourned until next morning, the Court being ad. journed on aceouut of the funeral of the late jYlr. J. Richmond in the afternoon. POLICE COURT.-Toesday. [Before Messrs. C. £>. Whitcombe and G. P. Fierce, J.P.'s.] Drunkenness. —A woman was fined 5s and costs for this offence* f iGiiTiNG. —Charles Godfrey and William Shakespere (on summons) were charged with fighting in Grey-street. Sergeant Pratt, on behalf of Mr. Theo. Cooper, was instructed for the prosecution, and applied for an adjournment to Friday. Mr. C. E. Madden, who appeared for Godfrey, offered no objection. Adjourned to Friday next. The Assault Case. — William George Garrard (adjourned from Saturday), was charged with assaulting Thomas B. Hanoatord by striking him on the face with hie clenched fist, on May 13. There was a cross summons, in which Hannaford was charged with striking Garrard on the head with a atick. Mr. O'Me»gher appeared for Garrard, who pleaded not guilty, and Mr. T. Cotter (instructed by Mr. W. Thome) for Hannaford. It was decided to take the evidence in both cases together. Mr. Cotter in opening explained the public notoriety which the parties had gained in the case by reason of what had occurred being reproduced in the Press- He submitted that the evidence he would adduoe would warrant the Bench in ordering Garrard to find sureties to keep the peace towards Hannaford. Thomas Brown Hannaford, sigent, carrying on business in Auckland for the past thirty years, remembered Thursday afternoon, May 13. When he was engaged in his office, aa a gentleman, the door was partly open, and he heard the man Garrard say something to his wife. He went out with some letters and a pile of papers to ascertain the cause. Garrard demanded of him who had written to the Press concerning him. Witness replied that if Garrard placed himself in the position of a public character he had to take the oonseqnences. Garrard made use of some insulting remark, and said he (Hannaford) was a nuisance to the place, and he had come to have satisfaction, larrard then rushed at him, and struck him a blow in the face. It was straight out from the shoulder, and he reeled from the blow. In consequence of what he had heard he had reason to believe the assault would be repeated. He would be unable to write jomu petitions he had in hand (laughter, and objection raised by Mr. O'Meagher) to forward to Parliament. He also had a petition for the Tasmanian Government. (Renewed laughter, and cries of " silence" from the Court orderly.) Cross-examined :He recognised the stick produced (a knotty hockey stick). It belonged to ais little hoy, who usually left his playthings in the office. He was so frenzied at the time the blow was given that he could not remember what occurred afterwards. There was a scuffle, aud they reeled. That was all he could remember* Hβ did not use the " little Lenten pastoral staff " before him. He was not certain whether he used it, nor did Le remember who removed it from the ecene of battle. It may have been taken by the polioe. He did not remember whether his daughter was present. He knew there was a right-of-way passage alongside his house, by which he could leare the house by the back and enter Queen-asreet. Ann Hannaford, wife of the tirat witness, deposed to the defendant (Garrard) calling at the shop, and described the "scene." Jessie Freer, daughter of the last witness, was also examined as to the appearance of Garraid at the shop door. William George Garrsrd said he went up to Hannaford's office, when a man from the Observer office called with an account. Witness addressed Hannaford straightforwardly, and asked him what he had been writing to the evening paper about him for, and ridiculing his character. Hannaford replied by calling him a "d loafer." Witness was then on the pavement, and he said he would make him " sweat" for it in the Supreme Court. Hannaford ruehed at him, and he seized him by the nose. He heard Miss Freer say, "Oh father, why did you strike him with a stick." J. B. Killian, strncilplate cutter, was crossing over the roadway from Grey-etreet, when Garrard was being pushed out of the door by two women, and then Hannaford appeared from the right-of-way with a stick, followed Garrard, and struck him three or four blows when he was unaware of what was coming. Garrard had gone the breadth of two shops wheu Hannaford appeared. To the Bench : Hβ followed in an exoited manner with a stick in hie hand. Thos. Krans, hotel proprietor, gave corroborative evidence as to the ejectment of Garrard from the office. Dr. Tennent deposed that he dressed the wound, which was on the crown of the head, and about a inch and a-hali' long. To Mr. Cotter : He had not attended it on the following day. Watson Perry, corset maker and neighbour, deposed that he heard no altercation in the office, but heard a scuffle in the street. Au application by Mr. Cotter to uddreee the Court on the evidence adduced in support of his part of the case, was overruled by the Bench. Mr. Cotter said it was unfortunate that they had not a stipendiary magistrate who was aware of how to conduct evidence. It practically placed them in a false position. Mr. Pierce replied that the Bench were guided more by the evidence than by the eloquence of counsel. In announcing their dec'eion, the Bench said the case against Garrard had not been sustained, and in the second information against Hannaford, they considered an assault had been committed, and imposed a tine of £5 and costs, or 14 days' imprisonment with hard labour. The costs amounted to £4 14s, and along with the fine made a total of £9 14s, which Hannaford decided not to pay, and was committed to Mount Eden yesterday afternoon.