Pahiatua S.M. Court.

Pahiatua Herald, Volume II, Issue 237, 7 December 1894, Page 2

Pahiatua S.M. Court.

Thursday, 6th December^ f Before Messrs Iteese and Hughes. J’<p.J

W. Vile r. Marion Knight. Defendant wa* charged with having assaulted a bamif while in the execution of his duty, also with having tried to rescue good* levied on by the Court nod with having rescued goods that had been levisd on by the 5.M. Court. All the charges were taken together. Mr G. li. Smith appeared for the acmised, and contended that a bailiff could not seize any property without presenting a warrant. He contended that in the execution of a warrant it was necessary to hare the warrant with lmu.

Mr A. W. Gould, who appeared to prosecute, quoted from innumerable authorities in answer to Mr Smith’s contention.

William Vde depose 1 that he was a baili.T, and on the day in questiou he oad authority to seize a trap and horse t-o \ Satisfy a judgment obtained in the S.M. j Court. lie saw a trap and horse standing in Main street, and asked the occupants, young Knight and his sister, if that was Mr Knight s trap; they said it wft*. Mrs Knight then came out of a shop and entered the trap. Young Knight then came *ound the trap to assault him as instructed by Jus mother. Mrs Knight was continually lashing him with a whip. He was at the horse’s head and defendants took the cushion out of the trap. lly Mr Smith : He was struck on the arm a number of times and Mrs Knight tried to start the horse. Witness produced the warrant publicly. The trap, horse and harness belonged to Mr Briggs ; he found this out afterwards.

J. Miller, W. Cooper and I*. Mackinlmy having given evident* as to the production of the warrant, Mr Gould closed his case.

Mr Smith contended that the bailiff had no right to seize the property a* it belonged to Mr Briggs; the case must therefore be uisinissvJ.

Trie Bench deckled to hear evidence for tiie defence.

Mr Smith called Mrs Marlon Knight, the defendant, who deposed that the plaintiff made himself very obnexioa*. She rc-q -ted him to coins out with them and he cou!d bring tiie trap bark if he hnd a right to it. She might hav# ■'truck \ ile, but it was not done intention illy. She never saw the warrant. Agatha Knight, daughter of tiie last witness, deposed that «he never saw* the warrant. Her mother was trying to drive the horse and Vile va« preventing, it from moving. Vile told her mother id take the things out of the trap. Herbert Knight, brother of the previous witness, gave evidence for the defence. A fine of 10« each on the first two I charges was inflicted, the third one being ! dismissed. Costs were allowed to the extent of £2 If*. Mr Smith gave notice of appeal. ine cast s against Henry Knight Wf re i Ain on the evidence taken in the prej vie as case, and the defendant was fim-d ALLK'iKH THF.IT. Higgins vraa charged with having stolen a t.u of k rowor. the pro- ] prrty of Dav.u Corkburn, storeket-per, : I of the police and Mr A. \Y. Gocld de- ! fended the accused. I >avid Cock burn depov d that he wa- a I in August las: . i reparted the j m uter to Constable Murphy. Wi.ne>s, , Mr lacker and the consi.tble went to the j accused i* house and found a tin of keroj sene under a log. The brand was the • only brand he had evtr had in stock. He had never sold the accused any kerosene. | "lhe witness was cross-examined at I W illi&ui Henry Collett deposed tliat he ! had worked fjr the accused at the Maj ur ‘- H® was fifteen years of age. I Higgins had told him he had taken the I kerosene. | Tiit witness was cross-examined bv Mr Gould. IN iHiam Barlow deposed that he had worked for the defendant. Higguis artd he helped defendant bury the Un. C i>ckburn came into the bn«h while thev were bury inf the kifosns. When Higgins saw Cockbnrn lie ran away with :iic tin into the bush: he returned afterwards and they buried it. John Denis Murphy, conn aMe at Makuri. deposed that lie had had complaints of theft made to him sinoe he had been stationed there. Had search warrants sent to him. ’(The irideaco as to the finding of the kerosene wa* the sams a* that given by David Cockbarn.) 1!d ward Tucker gave unimportant evidence.

j Th - closed the case for the prosecution. William Higgins, the defendant, was called by Mr Gould, who put m a receipt for stores, among-: which was a tin of i Defendant was cros« examined bv Constable Cooper. t h;n Ting wa- tailed to prove the i receipt*. David Cock burn, recalled said he j oou ’ 1 * ,u> * *w« ar to tho tin of kerosene produe«\l in Court. •I i . A second charge against the same wvused was withdraw*;! by the pdice.