MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11398, 15 April 1899, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

. -FRIDAY, AFBIL 14-. (Before Air E. H. Carcw, S.M.) E. J. Bryant v. Willinm Fanning, William J. Lacey, and Archibald Burc.—Claim £8 10s. on a promissory note.—Judgment was given for tho plaintiff, with costs (14s), by default. Same v. Jamee K. M'Connocliie. — Claim fill 6s on a judgment summon*.—Defendant, who did not appear, was ordered to pay £7 15s still due, with costs (15s), by weekly instalments of 10s, in default IT days' imprisonment. Same v. Wm. Reid.—Claim £9 5s on a judgment summons.—Defendant, who did not appear, was ordered to pay £2 7s still due, with costs (225), on May 15, in default four days' imprisonment. Willinm Lloyd v. Samuel Goldcton.— Claim £25 damages for alleged'assault and battery.—Mr Hanlon appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Chapman for defendant. Further evidence for the plaintiff- in this partially-^ heard case was taken, after which Mr Chapman addressed the court for the defence. Counsel Elated that after listening to what he had to Fay, and to the evidence he proposed to call, his Worship must come to the conclusion that the case made out for the plaintiff was a very unsatisfactory one. A more unsatisfactory case was never heard in that court. Lloyd did not attempt to suggest a reason for. the alleged conduct of the defendant. Although he said that the latter tried to steal and rob from him, he did not endeavour to support it, for to susgeet that defendant., attempted to rob a man in his own . shop in broad daylight was f,o ludicrous that even Mr Lloyd did not persist in it. The subsequent actions of the defendant went far to show that he was innocent of the accusation against him. He actually charged tho.police to go to Lloyd's house and see if they could get the hammer identified, and subsequently he went round to all the shoemakerß in town to fee if any of them had lost a shoemaker's hammer. Eventually, lie discovered that a man named Scott, a shoemaker, who had been in the, shop some months, before, had left the hammer, and had forgotten to call for it. The fact of Scott having recognised tho hammer recalled the incident to Mr Goldsfon's mind, and he remembered that the.hammer had been placed by itself on a shelf near the counter till Scott returned. Scott did not return, and it lay there forgotten^ Having, at some length, criticised the evidence produced for the plaintiff, counsel went on to refer to the facts oE tlio case as he proposed to present them to his Worship. Ho said that Goldston would state that instead of Lloyd being in the shop all the time, he went into the kitchen to examine the waterproof coat, and, a customer coming into the shop, both returned. After the customer went away, Goklston went behind tho counter, and while there he was attacked by Lloyd. Subsequently in the slrugglo Lloyd knocked his head against the -window, and broke it, and it was surmised that it was thus he sustained the injury to his head. Goldston positively denied that, in the whole-affair,' he struck the other man a blow. —A witncFs named Scplt then gave evidence.He said that formerly he. was a. bootmaker, and in February, 1898, he went to G.oldston's place and pawned a pair of pants. He was slightly under the influence^ drink. He left tho hammer .there, purposing to. call- for", it. again, but forgot till ribont'ib till Mr Goldß'tpn called upon him, and asked him if ho lost a hammer. Ho' remembered that ho had, and at Mr Goldston's tuggestiou went to the police station to examine the one there. He. identified it as his.—'Defendant-then gave cvi-, dence, He;staled that the customer who came into .the shop when Lloyd was there, pawned a picture. After the customer had'go-no, he bent down .to put the picture underneath tho counter. While in a stooping position he heard a hissing noise, and instinctively glancing up saw Lloyd in the act of aiming a blow at his head with a hammer. He stood up and seized hold of his hand. Eventually witness got on to the same side of the counter whore Lloyd was. -He thought he had to deal with a madman, and he cried out " Murder," at tho same time seizing Lloyd.tightly round the waist. Witness commenced pulling Lloyd towards the door to put him out. Lloyd put his foot against the door, and witness could not open it. A further struggle ensued, in the course of which Lloyd knocked his head against the window, and knocked a hole in it. Witness saw some children outside, and afterwards Mr .Duthio came up and tried to open the door, but ho could not open it because Lloyd and witness were leaning against it. Mr Dulhie put his bead through the, broken pane of glass, and cried "Let go," and witness and Lloyd letting go of each other, Duthie came in. Witness was 68 years of age. After the struggle witness found his Spectacles on the floor, all broken. Duthie told witness to let Lloyd go, as he was an old friend of his. Witness sent for a policeman, and when ho was In tho lobby Duthie pressed him to let Lloyd go. Lloyd was inside the shop at the time, and he held up a £1 note and lialf-sovereiim, and said, "That man tried to rob mo of this." Witness never saw the money before.- Lloyd held up a shoemaker's hammer and said, "He tried to hit me with that hammer." That was tho first witness saw of the hammer. As soon as John Duthio heard Lloyd say, "He tried to hit me with the hammer." ho tobtf the hammer from Lloyd and ran into his shop. Witness ran after him, and, said he should leave things exactly as they were for the police, but he refused. Afterwards Constable Daubney arrived, and witness gave Lloyd, who was in the shop alone, in charge. There was a crowd of people at the door. The constable said that witness must frame a charge against him, and witness said' that the charge would be of creating a disturbance in the shop. Constable Daubney took Lloyd away to the hospital. Sergeant Higgins arrived immediately afterwards, and acked where the prisoner was? Witness told him that the prisoner had just left in charge of the constable. Sor.tr.eant Higgins then said, "I arrest you," and witness was taken to the police station. Witness never told Sergeant Higgins that he struck Lloyd. Witness was sure that the. hammer never came back from Duthio's place to him. He was sure that he never handed the hammer to Sergeant Higgins. Witness was not aware of the existence of tho hammer in his place. It was never pledged to witness, or sold by him. To find out who owned tho hammer, witness and tho police visited a dozen shoemakers, and they said that they did not lose a hammer. When he came to Scott, he told witness that he lost a hammer. Witness told him to go to the police, and find out if it was his hammer. Witness then remembered that Scott had come to his place to pledge the hammer, but he was drunk, and witness would not tako it. Scott left tho hammer behind, and witness forgot about it.—Another witness (a glazier) was then called, and stated that ho mended the window. The window had been broken by some large object, such as a head knocking against it, and it had been firmly in the frame.—The case was then adjourned till Wednesday next.