RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 770, 3 December 1886, Page 9

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday, November 25. (Before Mr H. S. Wardell, R.M.) CIVIL BUSINESS.

Judgments for plaintiffs.—United Importers’ Company v Henderson, £1 Is Bd, and costs £% lls; Turnbull, Smith, and Co. v W. Lewis, £27 7s ; Cato Bros, v G. Traske, £8 6s 4d; J. J. Boyd v V. Johnson, 18s ; J. M. Cleland v H. Bennett, £4 4s ; same v A. Oliver, £8 18s ; same v O. N. Petersen, £3 7a 6d. Farther evidence was taken in the case Bedford v Levin, in which his Worship reserved judgment. The case Houguez v Robinson was continued, the further hearing being adjourned at 7 o’clock. . ,

Friday, November 26.5 (Before Mr H. S. Wardell, R.M.) DRUNKENNESS. -. ' William Donelly was fined 53 for drunkenness, this being the first offence within six months. LARCENY. Frances Curry was charged with stealing, in July last, a pair of gold solitaires valued at £2 10s, the property of Joseph Ward. The evidence of Detective Chrystal, who arrested the accused, was taken. In answer to his Worship the witness said Mr Ward reported the matter to him. The accused was arrested without a warrant. His Worship said he objected to this arresting without a warrant where a warrant could be issued. It was legal, 110 doubt, but it should be exercised with great discretion. Evidence was called to prove that the accused pawned the solitaires for 93 on the 29th July last. Joseph Ward was called, but did not' appear, and Inspector Browne asked for a remand. The case was remanded till later in the day. It was subsequently called on, and Ward, being called, gave evidence to the effect that he lost the solitaires produced, which were his property. He lost them in his house. Did not know the accused at all. The accused elected to be dealt with summarily, admitting the offence, and was sentenced to three months’ hard labor. CIVIL CASES. In the case Jellicoe v Blower, claim £lB 7s sd, for professional services rendered,

judgment was given for plaintiff. —In the case Bedford and Levin, claim. £3O, judgment was given for defendants with costs, £3 2s.—The case William Hutchison v the Union S.S. Co., claim £SO, for damages for injuries sustained by falling into an open lazaretto, was JjWith drawn on the plaintiff s application, through Mr Skerrett. Judg. ment for plaintiff was given for £2O in the case Letitla Johnston v Walter and Jane England.

Monday, November, 29. (Before Messrs Halse, Greenfield and Lachman, Justices.) . ASSAULT.

George Fisher was charged with having assaulted Emanuel Henry Goldsmith on the 15th November, 18S6, He pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr Fitz Gerald. Mr Edwards appeared on behalf of the prosecutor. Emanuel Henry Goldsmith deposed that he had attended a meeting called by the defendant as a shareholder in the Occidental Goldmining Company. When he entered the Empire Hotel, where the meeting was held, Mr Fisher laid his hands on him, and told him that he was not admitted there as the meeting was private, and that he (Mr Fisher) had paid for the room. Mr Fisher also threatened to put him out if he did not withdraw voluntarily, which he did after some words had passed. By Mr ' Fitz Gerald: Was not aware that the meeting was held in reference to the conduct of Mr Tabor as liquidator of the Company. Thought it was held in reference to the winding up of the Company’s affairs. He had not been informed by Mr Gilmer that he must not enter the room. George Dungan deposed that he was present at the meeting in his capacity as a reporter. He saw Mr Fisher put his hand on Mr Goldsmith, and heard him request Mr Goldsmith to leave, and heard Mr Goldsmith say he would stop as he had been called there as a shareholder by an advertisement which appeared in the papers. Witness deposed further that the defendant had taken his hand off on the plaintiff requesting him to do so. Mr FitzGerald asked the Bench whether it was worth while going on with the case, as it was such a trivial one. The Bench decided to hear the defence. For the defence, Mr Fitz Gerald said that the fact of the defendant having hired the room made the meeting a private one as much as if it had been held at his private residence. He contended that Mr Fisher s action did not amount to an assault, as he had only passively obstructed the plaintiffs entrance, and had not assaulted him in any way. Hamilton Gilmer, landlord of the Empire Hotel, deposed to having rented the room to the defendant on the night in question. He had told the plaintiff that he was not wanted in the room. The plaintiff, however, had persisted, and had gone in. Mr Edwards: He was paid a shilling for the use of the room. It was one of the ordinaly public rooms of the hotel, but was not much used. Charles Hickson deposed to having been at the meeting on the 15th inst. He had seen the plaintiff enter the room, and the defendant put out his hand to stop him. The plaintiff had retired after making some impertinent remarks as to bow Mr Fisher had paid for the room. After further evidence, the Bench decided to dismiss the case, each side to pay its own costs.

Wednesday, December 1. (Before Mr a H. S. War dell, R.M.) drunkenness.

Christina Lawson, an old offender, was charged with drnakenness. Accused pleaded guilty, and was fined £l, or four days’ imprisonment. LARCENY. William A. Walden and John E. Walden, two small boys, were charged with stealing an overcoat, valued at 7a 6d, the property of Frank Walton, and another overcoat, valued at 30s, the property of Walter Smith, from the Mount Cook School. Both boys pleaded not guilty. Mr Jellicoe appeared for the defence. Frank Walton, a little boy, gave evidence as to missing his coat from the school on the 22nd November. E. Metz, pawnbroker’s assistant, deposed that the younger of the accused boys pledged the coat in question, stating that his mother, whose name he gave as Mrs Jackson* had no bread to eat, and his father was out of work. He also brought a note, which purported to have been written by his mother. ActingDetective Walker gave evidence as to arresting the accused. A third charge of stealing another coat belonging to a boy named Hitson was withdrawn as against both boys. The elder of the accused, William A. Walden, was dismissed. His Worship remanded the other boy for a month, hiß father being required to enter into a recognisance that he would appear at the end of that period. AFFILIATION CASE. An order was made against Peter Connell for the payment of 8s per week toward the maintenance of his illegitimate female child.

NEGLECTED CHILDREN. Three children named William Francis, Charles Robert, and Alice Maud Peterson, were charged with being neglected children. His Worship remanded the case in order to ascertain whether the mother, who is about to be released from gaol, is fit to take care of them. MALICIOUSLY WOUNDING. William Williams, able seaman, was charged with unlawfully and maliciously wounding Alfred Bowling, chief officer of the ship Timaru, while on the high seas on November Bth. Mr Bell, Crown Prosecutor, conducted the prosecution, and Mr Jellicoe appeared for the defence. Dr Fell stated that he was called to attend the chief officer of the vessel. Found marks of a wound about an inch in length on the right side, the sixth and seventh ribs, and some swelling extended for several inches round. There were signs about the wound which indicated that there had been an effusion of fluid into the pleura. Would expect such effusion to follow a wound in the base of the lung. If the patient spat blood that would be another proof of injury to the lung. Witness would suppose that the wound, from its appearance, was caused by a cutting instrument, such as a knife. Cross-examined : Hemorrhage from the lung might possibly have been due to other causes than a wound. .Bowling was still suffering from pleurisy, but witness did not think he would have had it before be received the wound. To Mr Bell : Had not found anything to in-

dicate that Bowling was suffering from any organic disease of the lung. Attributed the pleurisy to the effects of the wound, Alfred Bowling, chief officer of the ship Timaru, deposed that on the Bth November last the vessel was aomewhat off the Kaikouras. He called the port watch at about 7.30 a.m. to haul taut the weather forebraces. The port watch ,were on duty at the time ; they had been on duty since 4 a.m. The starboard watch were to come on duty at 8 a.m. All but the accused came when ordered. Noticed he was not in the watch when they came along. After the fore-braces had been hauled taut, witness sent the watch aft to haul taut the main brace, and then went to the forecastle to see where the accused was. It was blowing a N.W. gale, and the ship was hove-to, and . in such weather it was difficult to work the ship shorthanded. Saw Williams in the forecastle; he was dressing himself, and standing 3 or 4 feet inside the door. Witness asked Williams what he was doing there, and why he did not come out with the rest of the watch. Williams replied that he would come out when he was ready. Witness said, “ You must come out at once, as the men have had plenty of time to change their clothes. Why havn’t you ?” He said, “ I’ll take my time, and come ont when I am ready,” to which witness replied that he would come and pull him out if he did not come at once. Williams then said that there was not a man in the ship who would take him out of that. Witness said he would .for one, and went inside and caught hold of the accused round the neck. There was a short struggle, and the two men fell over a chest. The accused called the starboard watch, to witness that he had struck him. Witness shortly after went outside and took off his coat to better enable him to get the accused out. He went into the forecastle again and caught hold of the prisoner. Noticed that he had a knife or something in his hand. When he got hold of him the accused stabbed him in the right side. Tried to get hold of his hand and stop him from stabbing him again. As witness struggled with him accused fell over a cask. He shouted, “Take him off me or I will kill him.” At this time, Moore, one of the seamen, jumped on him from behind and caught his arm. Moore then called the rest of the watch to assist him. Blood was ruuning down the witness’i.side. He managed to walk aft, and was taken to the captain’s cabin, spitting blood all the time. Had been unable to do any work since. Had never had anything the matter with his lung before. By Mr Jellicoe : Believed the accused turned out with the 4 o’olock watch. The watch changed their clothes at 7 a.m. They were about , a quarter of an hour changing, and wheu they came out the accused was not with them. Was in a good temper when he went to the forecastle. Some of the men wore belts, and usually carried sheath knifes. Could not say if Williams had his belt on when he first saw him. When - the watch turned in they sometimes put their knives in their bunks, or in a rack. Was determined that Williams should come out, as he had had plenty of time to change. Gould not say if the accused had his belt on during either of the struggles- Took the law hands, because the accused had given him a lot of cheek. Could not remember having struck a seaman. Two or three minutes elapsed between the time when he asked the accused to come out and when he caught hold of him. Duncan Fullerton, master of the ship Timaru, deposed that he saw the chief officer go forward after the fore braces were hauled taut. A few minutes afterward saw the chief officer coming out of the forecastle with his coat off and bleeding from the aide. After he had seen the wounded man taken to his cabin and the wound dressed, he gave orders for the arrest of prisoner. Kept the accused in irons till the ship arrived in Wellington. Made an entry in'the log which he read over to the prisoner on the 9th. The prisoner said there was a little truth in it, but a great lot of lies, that it had been concocted by some devil, and he wwald answer it further in Court. By Mr Jellicoe : Bis entry in the log contained no lies so far as he knew. Had written it from information received* Held no formal inquiry into the matter. Was surprised to see the chief officer without hia coat. It was the chief officer’s duty to report any disobedience on the part of the crew. The chief officer was guilty of a breach of discipline in removing Williams without first consulting witness. Some of the men wore sheath koives in their belts. Made no separate entry of a breach of discipline on the part of the chief officer. John Moore, able seaman, stated that after the chief officer left the forecastle the first time, tbe prisoner ran to his bunk and got his knife. As witness was going out ot the door he called out to the mate ‘ ‘ look out, sir.” Saw Williams strike the officer with his knife in the side. The prisoner’s arm was raised in the act of striking, the officer again vhen witness seized Williams from behind. Francis Edwards, another seaman, was examined. In cross-examination, he stated that he considered it was necessary for Williams to defend himself against thorough conduct of the mate. Would have defended himself if he had been in the same position. Thomas Rose gave evidence as to seeing the accused after the affair, when he (accused) said that he was sorry that he did not cut the mate’s hand off. Arthur Mate, third officer of the ship Timaru, stated that on the morning m question he went forward with the boatswain and the carpenter, and told Williams to come aft. He said he would not, because he was frightened of being kicked about. When they were putting the accused into; the engine-room he said he was sorry he bad stabbed the mate in the side. He said he intended to cut the tendons of his wrist, and ruin him for life. By Mr Jellicoe : The prisoner was perfectly calm when he made this remark. This closed the case for the; prosecution. For the defence Mr Jellicoe called Henry Francis Dillon Bell, Crown Prosecutor, who stated that he was not the writer of the letter produced, but he dictated it. The letter was written by the firm of Bell, Gully, and Izard, as solicitors for the Shaw, Saviil, and Albion Co., owners of the ship Timaru, in reference to a claim made by he accused against the captain. The witness stated that in no way whatever was

he appearing for Captain Fullerton. No communication w-hatever passed between the Company and witness relative to the present case. Hadinstr'ucfcionsfromtheCommissioner of Police to prosecute in this case. John Peterson, able seaman, remembered the morning of the Bth November. Stated that he heard the accused say, in answer to the mate, that he would come out as Boon as he got his oilskins on. The mate said that he (meaning Williams) was always behind and was a “useless article.” With that, the mate rushed at accused. At this stage the Court adjourned till 7.30. On resuming, John Peterson stated that the mate Btruck the accused and then there was a struggle. The mate went out and took off his coat and asked the accused if he was coming outside. The mate used very bad lan-.uage, and said if the accused was going to have the law of him in Wellington, he would have the worth of it now. The mate went into the forecastle a second time and struck the accused. In dressing to go on deck the accused would put his belt on. The only cause for the row, in witness’ opinion, was that Williams was too long in changing. By Mr Jellicoe : The blow was struck by the mate before the struggle on both occasions. Peter Jensen gave evidence to the mate abusing and striking the accused. John Synerton stated that he heard the mate go into the forecastle, and shortly after heard the accused shout out, “See here, you fellows, did you se® him strike me.” Witness heard the mate ask Williams if he was going to prosecute him when he got to Wellington, and W illiams replied that he was. Stanley Richard Humphries gave similar evidence. Samuel Campbell was called, but knew very little about the affair. This was all the evidence. Mr Jellicoe asked for an adjournment, stating that he had a long day, and owing to his late illness did not feel physically capable of addressing the Court on the evidence. Mr Bell did not think there was any course open to his Worship but to commit the accused. His Worship said that he could hardly conceive any possible address that would induce him to alter tbe opinion he had formed of the case. He considered a prima facie case had been made out. After some further discussion the case was adjourned till 10 o’clock on Friday morning, when Mr Jellicoe will address the Court for the defence. The Court rose at 10.15.

CIVIL CASE.

An immediate judgment summons case, brought by E. J. Goldsmith against James Thomas, was dismissed, it being shown that the defendant was not about to leave Wellington, as set forth by an affidavit filed by the plaintiff. Mr Thompson appeared for the defendant.