MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXIX, Issue 3648, 26 January 1899, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Wednesday. January 25. (Before Messrs E. Arnold and J. P. Luke, Justices.) ALLEGED ASSAULT. Henry Clements, charged with causing grievous bodily harm to Lizzie McKenna, was remanded till February Ist, the woman being still in the Hospital and unable to appear, “ TOTE ” ODDS. ,T. F. Bowles and Thomas Thompson pleaded guilty to laying totalisator odds on the Hntt Racecourse, and were fined : 40s each, or 14 days imprisonment in; default. Solomon Lewis, similarly charged, also pleaded guilty and was fined 80s, or 21 days imprisonment. Mr Wilford appeared for Thompson and Lewis. LAnUIKIXISM. ■ David Hedges appeared on remand on, n charge of having assaulted James Dunn.,, Tlio case arose out of the doings of -a ’ gang of larrikins in Taranaki street. The young fellow’s employer gave him a very good character,' but said he had got mixed up with a gang of larrikins in the evenings. The Bench imposed a fine of £l, with 11s costs, and advised the defendant to seek better company. Mr "Wilford appeared for the defendant. .

ALLEGED CRUELTY. William Woods pleaded not guilty to a charge of cruelty to a pig. Mr M. To 1 - hurst prosecuted on behalf of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and Mr Wilford appeared for the defendant. Defendant was driving .some pigs, one of which lagged behind, and it f was alleged that he struck the animal a heavy blow-with a slip rail, causing it to bleed profusely from the nose and renderling it dazed. For the defence it was contended that the pig was a savage one, and that it charged defendant, who struck it in self-defence.—The Bench dismissed tho case. MOTHER AND SON. Margaret Henderson pleaded not guilty .to a charge of having committed an assault on her son William, 13 years of ago, on the 9th inst. Dr Findlay appeared for the defendant. Mrs Morris, who lived next door to the defendant in Hugh street, Newtown, said she saw defendant throw a piece of a brick at the boy as he was on the shed. It struck him on the back. Later ■ on she ■ saw tho boy running out of the house, screaming, and just after that she heard Mrs Henderson say she had scalded the boy and that she would roast him alive. The next morning Mrs Henderson told hor the boy was pretty badly burnt and that she had put kerosene over him. Mrs Henderson told her she had been taking wine and the boy had prevented her taking it.—To Dr Findlay : She had been a tenant of defendant’s, but was so no longer. She lived next door to her for nine months. The boy had never troubled her. Mrs Henderson gave her to understand that she scalded the boy puirposely—To Inspector Pender : She had had no quarrel with Mrs Henderson. Loujs Morris, husband of the previous witness, deposed to hearing defendant say to the boy that she would roast him alive. Previous to that the boy had run screaming out of the house.—By Dr Findlay; About three months ago he told the hoy he ought to be ashamed of himself for the way he i “cheeked” his mother.— Amy McGee said after the occurrence she saw the ’ boy come out of the house. The back of his neck was wet and he was screaming.—Dr Alexander stated that ho saw the boy on the 12th inst. He was in bed and Mrs Henderson said he had been scalded accidentally by some water which sho was throwing out of the door as he was passing. There were scalds on the left leg and the back of tlie neck ; one rather a bad one. Sho said she did not throw the water at the boy, hut that tho scalding Was accidental. She added that the hoy had beeft aggravating her, saying she was drunk. To Dr Findlay: Ho always, was of opinion that Mrs Henderson”thought a lot of the boy and that she was a kind mother.— Elizabeth, Martin said defendant told her she bad scalded the boy; that she was throwing the water out of tho teapot and thought he would get out of the way. She also said he had been aggravating her.—Constable Kelly said Mrs Henderson told him that she was rinsing out the teapot and the hoy got in the way as she ,■ was throwing the hot water out. Sue added that her son had aggravated her.— For the defence Dr Findlay said this was defendant’s only child, whom she had spoiled, and who had got out of her control. On .this day he told her she was drunk, which aggravated her considerably.' Later on she was rinsing the teapot and the boy, who was coining in as the water was .thrown out,, was scalded.. Some of the neighbours generously informed the police and the result was that Mrs Henderson was taken into custody.—The Bench expressed the opinion -that the water was thrown accidentally, and they therefore dismissed the case. THEFT OF FRUIT. '(: Seven boys of respectable appearance pleaded guilty to the theft of a quantity of apples from Mr Chas. Fowler’s orchard. Mr Wilford .appeared for, the defendants, who, he said, had been thrashed by their parents and their parents would thrash them again if necessary.—lnspector Pender said this kind of theft had been going on for some time; The parents, wore to blame for not looking after the boys. They should not, he allowed to go about in gangs. The Bench gave the youngsters some good advice, warning them that' they : would,* be dealt ’ with severely, if. they came before the Bench again. The present case .would; be dismissed. . ‘ (Before Mr Kenny, S.M.) maintenance. For disobeying, an order of the Court for the support of his wife. W. H. Barrow was sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment, the warrant to be suspended until February Bth.THE banpurly hotel.

A charge against a man named McGee of obstructing Constables Lavdner and Hof- - fernan in the execution of, their duty was adjourned until Wednesday next. Tho case arose out of-the charge against the licensee of the hotel for not admitting the police within reasonable time,, which case was dismissed on the ground that McGee was not an,employee of Crossey’s. :