RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. YESTERDAY.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume VII, Issue 1073, 16 April 1880, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. YESTERDAY.

(Before M. Price, Esq., KM.) Cross-examination of Wi Pere by Mr. Ward continued : I might have been taken when drunk to sign, if I did sign before them ; nor do J know as to whether I signed or acknowledged my signature to the accused when I was drunk. I know nothing about it. I again say that I did not sign or acknowledge my signature to the deed before Dr. Nesbitt or Worgan. I know that Henare Ruru signed the deed B. I do not think Paora Tapore signed it, or that he was there when his name was put on the deed. I signed Riria's name. She was not present. I was a man given to drink in 1870, and on that day the deed B was signed, both Europeans and Maories were drinking. I am on terms of disagreement with the accused ; did I bear malice I would drive his stock off my land. I had instructed Mr. Rees prior to ray stock being seized to take action in this matter. Riparata Kahutia sworn : I signed my name to the deed B and saw Wi Pere, Henare Ruru, I signed other names, on being asked to do so by Wyllie. I told him I was afraid to sign the names of my relatives, and that they had better sign for themselves. Wyllie said that the law allowed me to sign for my relatives, and 1 signed their names. 1 signed the name of Taiheke. I think I signed for 9or 10, but I am not certain without seeing the deed. I also saw Wi Pere sign other names besides his own. These were names of hisjpeople. The accused was not present when I and the others signed the names. The names of those I saw signed were so signed to the deed in one day. Wyllie was the only witness. By Mr. Ward : The deed B was signed at Bradley's Hotel, and by those I have been asked about on the same day. I think the deed was signed in 1869 or 1870. If Wyllie has sworn that the accused was present when the parties I have named signed the deed, it would be false. I cannot Bay if Riria was there in the room ; or not, there were many others present whom I cannot recollect.

This Day.

Assault. John Swift against James Mcßride, for assault. Mr. Rogan for the defendant. The complainant detailed that on the 7th instant the defendant knocked him down and kicked him, and knocked him down a second time ; got on top of him, pulled out some of his whiskers, and tried to throttle him. He called out "murder," and the defendant got up and went away. In cross-examination he said that he was not drinking with the defendant that night, and was not drunk. The defendant, at his own wish, being sworn, said that he and the complainant left Page's together. Had a few pints of liquor in him, and knows- nothiui? about layingjin wait for the complainant. Mr. Thompson said he was going home on the night in question, and overtook the complainant and defendant, who were talking in a high tone of voice. He saw no assault committed. Mr. Greenwood produced the records of the Court, which showed that the defendant was fined in January 1879 for assault. Sentenced to 7 days' imprisonment with hard labour. Civil Cases. W. S. Greene v. Hoani Ruru, £10, adjourned case. Mr. Cuff for the plaintiff. For the defence, Wi Pere said that he had examined the position where the tree in dispute had been left, and was of opinion that it was not on the plaintiffs land. His Worship, in granting a non-suit, said that he would not give a decision until it was clearly established that the tree had been stranded on plaintiff's land. If what the natives had done had been done under a mistaken idea that the land was not the plaintiffs, he would not make them pay much for the tree more especially as the plaintiff had to some extent taken the law into his own hands by breaking some of the teeth of a saw belonging to the natives. Hone Kewa against JR. Cooper for alleged perjury, was adjourned till Monday next at 10 o'clock. A. F. Hardy v. Rutene Ahuroa. Mr. Ward for the plaintiff, and Mr. Cuff for the defendant. This was an action to recover 500 sheep said by the plaintiff to one Wi §Pero, and which said sheep and their increase and progeny were by mortgage of stock assigned by the said Wi Pere to the plaintiff, and possession of such sheep has been demanded and refused, where the plaintiff now claims the said sheep or the value, yiz., £87 10a. Mr. Cuff contended that the Court had noj jurisdiction in the matter, and after the evidence of Wi Pere and the plaintiff had been taken, the Court granted a nonsuit on the application of counsel for the plaintiff. The case Wi Pere against A. F. Hardy, for alleged perjury was this afternoon further adjourned to Tuesday next, at 2 p.m., upon the application of Mr. Brassey for Mr. Rees.