LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9241, 19 December 1888, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

SUPREME COURT.— Sittings. Tuesday.

[Before His Honor Mr. Justice Gillies and a Jury of twelve.]

Colonial Bank of New Zealand v. .John Ramsay Stewart Richardson.— This was an action to recover £1100, money due to the plaintiffs by the Cambridge Dairy Produce Company. Mr. Cotter, instructed by Mr. Dyer, appeared for plaintiffs, and Messrs. Button and Hesketh, instructed by Messrs. Hesketh and Richmond, appeared for the defendant. His Honor "was first asked to decide who was to commence. The case was one in which the burden of proof rested on the defendant. The whole question of fact was whether, when the company entered into a mortgage, the defendants were released from personal liability. All the allegations were admitted except one, and that was admitted in a qualified way, subject to what the defendant said. llis. Honor directed the defendant's counsel to commence, and ab Mr. Cotter's request witnesses were ordered out of Court. The pleadings showed that) prior to November, ISS4, the bank, incompliance with the request of the defendant) and others, the directors of the Cambridge Produce Company, made certain advances, and in November, 18S4, the directors required further advances for the company, and they were made upon the directors entering into their joint and several guarantees for these advances and others, to the extent of £800. The defence, as already intimated, was that on the execution of a mortgage of the company's property, the directors were released from their personal guarantees. The first witness called by the defence, for the purpose of establishing the facts ns stated by counsel for the defence, was MrThompson, late secretary of the company ; Mr. Watts, the working manager, was also examined ; and Mr. Richardson, the defendant, also gave evidence. The crossexamination of this witness by Mr. Cotter j had not concluded when the Court ad- [ journed at about twenty minutes to five ; o'clock.

POLICE COURT.—Tuesday.

[Before Dr. Giles, K.M., and Mr. J. Gordon, J.P.J Drunkenness.— Barry, for habitual drunkenness, was ordered to pay £5, or in default undergo 14 days' imprisonment with hard labour. Vagrancy.— Taylor, an old offender, was sentenced to six months' imprisonment with hard labour for vagrancy Assault.—Carl Nelson, a seaman on the barque Sharpshooter, was charged with assaulting Magnus Carl Magnussen, the master of that vessel. The complainant deposed to the assault, which was committed on board the barque on Monday morning. Prisoner was the worse for liquor at the time, and witness had remonstrated with him for standing idle, when Neilson struck him in the face. The mate of the vessel came to the assistance of witness. A sentence of 14 days' imprisonment with hard labour was imposed. Breach of the Peace.—William Swanson and Henry Connoph were charged with having committed a breach of the peace on the sth instant by fighting in Queenstreet. When asked to plead, Mr. Swanson wished to make a statement as to how the affair occurred, but Dr. Giles said that the statement could not be made at that time ; and after some delay, Mr. Swanson admitted having struck the other defendant, but pleaded "justification." This was taken as a plea] of "Not guilty." Mr. Connoph pleaded guilty to having struck Mr. Swanson, urging, however, that he did so in defence. Sergeant Kiely deposed that on the sth instant he saw the defendants on the footpath in Queen-street, near the Herald Office. They appeared to be engaged in angry conversation. Connoph struck Swanson on the chest, and staggered him. Swanson made a blow at the other man with his stick, but witness did not think he struck him. He (Sergeant Kiely) was standing on the opposite side of the street, and he walked across. He saw Connoph step back, and Swanson then struck the other man on the mouth. The blow was returned, when a lady, who witness believed, was Mrs. Swanson, stepped between the parties. Constable Kelso also gave evidence for the prosecution. Mr. Swanson was examined, and deposed that on the day in question he was talking to his friend Mr. Berry in Queen-street, and he had an appointment with the manager of the Bank of New South Wales. Witness was on the kerb when Connoph stepped up and said, " You told me on your own doorstep that you wanted nothing from the Government, and that you would not take any position under them, and you have been mean enough to take a seat in the Council, where you are getting £200 a-year." He (Swanson) asked, "Who told you all that?" and Connoph replied, " Everybody knows it." Witness said that there was not a syllable of truth •in it, and that everybody who said it was lying. Connoph then called witness an impostor. Witness moved away, sis he was anxious to keep his appointment, but Connoph took him by the.arm and pushed him off the footpath, and blows were then struck. Mr. Connoph also gave evidence, and said that Mr. Swanson used ungentlemanly language when he (witness) spoke to him, and then struck him in the face. Witness returned the blow. Charles Burke also deposed to Swanson being the first to strike. Both defendants said that this statement was true. Dr. Giles said that both parties were to blame, and although Mr. Swanson had received some provocation he was not justified in striking a man in the street. A breach of the peace had been committed, and this fact could not be overlooked. Each of the defendants was therefore fined 40s and costs.