LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9217, 21 November 1888, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

R.M. COURT.— Tpesday. [Before Dr. Giles, R.M.] Macdonald v. Stephens.—The heaving of this case, an action for damages for injury through an aßsaulb, was further proceeded with. Mr. H. Williamson appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. OWleagher tor the defendant. Mr. O'Meagher opened the case for the defence, and said that many points in the evidence for the plaintiff would be flatly contradicted by the witnesses for the defence. Francis Stephens, the defendant, deposed that on the occasion in question, when he entered the room he did not, snatch tne knife from plaintiff. It was given to him (Stephens), and witness handed him (id, but the lid dropped on the floor, and witness tucked it up. Maedonald said that lie wanted os b'd, and he closed with witness, when the latter caught, him by the wrist, and put him on his back on the floor. Plaintiff goo up, and closed with witness again, and took out his (Stephens') watcu. In the struggle which then ensued, witness and plaintiff fell. Witness never put his foot upon the plaintiff. When Maedonald got up the second time witness shook hands with him, and he walked about the room, and ho did nob seem in pain, nor did he change, colour when on tne floor, as had been stated by Uilligan. He said a few moments afterwards, " Mon, I'm hurt," when witness said, "If you are hurt I'm very sorry, but it is your own seeking." (Jilligan did not come in the room until after the plaintiff and defendant shook hands. Plaintiff went away, and returned with a policeman, to whom witness grave his name and address. Witness was so upset by the occurrence that he could not take hie tea that evening Cross-examined : He had not the fashion of taking other people's things and appropriating them. He remembered an occasion at Motutapu when he took a boat—Mr. Reid gave him permission to take it. He had taken Mr. Bloom! boat, but he did not refuse to give it up—he apologised for having taken it. He did not have to be pulled ashore— rowed ashore. It was not a fact that Bloomiield pitched into witness for his impudence, and it was not because witness's wife came to the rescue that he did not get, more. He never heard anyone say in the room at the hotel that " anything that Stephens gets he sticks to." Henry Wake, tinsinitn, deposed that on the evening in question the plaintiff came into th room and wanted to show them a trick with pennies. They said they did'nt want to see any tricks just then, an they i were busy. However, he was persistent, and to get rid of him they let him .do the trick. Witness marked a penny at the request of Macdonaid. Plaintiff put five pennies in his hat, and then wanted to make a bet that he would take the marked penny from amongst them. They would not make any bets, and witness then took out the penny which witness had marked. At this time Mr. Stephens came into the room and sat down, and Mr. Macdonaid sat down in the chair next to him, and took a knife from his pocket, saying, " This is a very nice knife." Stephens took the knife, and at the same time ho pulled out sixpence, but plaintiff did not take it, and the com fell. Stephens picked up the sixpence and put it into his pocket, Macdonald closed with Stephens, and it seemed to witness that they were skylarking. Plaintiff said that he wanted his knife, or some sum of iiiuney, and Stephens threw him. Defendant pulled Macdonald up by the hand, and plaintiff thew himself on Stephens, and witness saw his (plaintiffs) hand go into defendant's vest pocket, and alter they wrestled, as it were, with i each other, witness saw Stephens' watch i guard was hanging down. He (Mr. Waite) came to the conclusion that there was something more serious than skylarking going on, and ho exclaimed, " Look out, j Stephens, he has got your watch." Stephens I seized Macdonaid by the hand, took the j watch from him, and put it into his pocket, \ and then threw him again, falling with j him. Defendant rose and lifted plaintiff up by the arms. Stephens never put his foot upon the plaintiff. Later in the evening plaintiff came into the hotel again, and asked the name of Mr. George, who I was present during the scullle, and he then made the remark, " It's a good job 1 didn't have a revolver in my pocket, or I would have shot the whole lot of you." Waite replied, " Yes, you would have robbed the whole lot of us if you had got the opportunity. The best thing you can do is to clear about your business." Cross-examined : Witness surmised when Mr. Macdonaid, a stranger, came into the room and wanted to bet money upon tricks, there was something wrong. They said, J " Once bit, twice shy," and lie looked with I suspicion upon strangers. The trick of the I fur cap that he (witness) did was one that i Professor Herbert taught him, and he paid 1 £250 for it. Since that he had a suspicion of stranger?. When Mr. Marshall was I going to Sydney an entertainment was given, and when the musician disappointed them Mr. Macdonaid came in and played. Ho did so very well, and he (Mr. Waite) made a spoech complimenting them, and Mr. O'Meagher also said something. When lie (witness) went out anywhere to entertain himself, he made it a point to entertain others too, but not for payment. Evidence was also given by 1). Hyauiason, W. H. Fertton, C. S. George, who witnessed the scuttle, and who all swore that Gilligan was not present at the time. Constable Lamb, the policeman who accompanied Macdonald to the Hotel, was also examined. Mr. Gilligan was again called at the suggestion of Mr. Williamson, and repeated his statement chat he was in the room when Stephens and Macdonald were struggling. Mr. O'Meagher asked Gilligan whether he did not tell a person named Armstrong that he was to get halfj the damages in this case if plaintiff succeeded. Witness replied that he did not think he said this—he could not swear to it. His Worship, in giving judgment, said there was no evidence to show that the defendant used undue violence, but the plaintiff had exercised considerable force, and he had caused the quarrel. He had no reason to doubt that the rupture arose either directly or indirectly from the occurrence, but the evidence was not enough to show that it was caused in the way stated by the plaintiff and Gilligan. Judgment was given for the defendant, with costs £10 Is.

POLICE COURT.— Tuesday.

[Before Messrs. H. Kees George, and L. Ehrenfried, J.lVsj Drunkenness. — For this offence Ann Lodge was fined £1 and costs, with an alternative of seven days' imprisonment in default. Helen Hemiston was lined £2 and costs, or fourteen days' imprisonment., and Maria Lysaght was lined lite and costs, or seven days' imprisonment. Larceny. — Five boys, named Joseph Scott (14), Thomas Beeston (12) Albert Parsons (13), William James Tanner (12), and Alfred Tanner (10), were charged with stealing a quantity of lemons, the property of H. J. Leßailly, on tho lhth of November, ab Devon port. The lads pleaded guilty. Mr. Broham stated that on Sunday afternoon the boys were driving some cattle, end when opposite |Mr. Leßailly's garden Scott led the way over the wall, and the other boys followed, and took all the lemons that they could find. The relatives of some of the boys were called upon, and addressed the Court. Mr. W. H. Brown said it was evident that the boys Tanner had been led into bad company. He had been asked to bail the lads out on the previous night, but he said he would not, as he thought they should suffer for the offence. He thought, however, that they had been punished by being locked up during tho night; certainly no good would be done by a fine. Mr. LeBailly, in answer to the Bench, said he had been constantly annoyed by boys stealing his fruit, and he had frequently had to go round to his trees on Saturday night to collect the lemons to prevent their being stolen. Their Worships adjourned the case until Thursday week, in order that the Probation Officer should report. Bail was allowed to the boys, each in a surety of £1. Patrick Dunne, for stealing tive tweed caps, the property of W. H. Potter, was

sentenced to three months' imprisonment with hard labour. Thomas Dixon was charged with stealing from the tent of Wilham John McDowell, at Stoney Creek, 21b of kauri gum, of the value of 7s, the property of the said W. J. McDowell. Mr. Baume appeared for the accused. Upon the application of Inspector Brohara, the case was remanded until Friday. Bail was allowed—prisoner in £30 and one surety of £15. George Powley, a lad of 10 years of age, pleaded guilty to a charge of stealing two pigeons, the property of Henry G.' Wade, on the 15th inst. The father of the boy stated that ho had no control over him, nor could his mother take charge of him. The boy stayed out at night, and did just what he liked. His (Mr. Powloy's) occupation was that of a cab-driver, and he had long hours, and the boy therefore .did what he pleased. Mr. Wade's representative said the object in bringing the charge was that the boy shuuid bo put into a safe place, where he could be taken charge of. The case was remanded until Thursday week, in order that the Probation Officer should report, Bail was allowed.