POLICE COURT.

Thames Star, Volume XXIX, Issue 8620, 26 March 1897, Page 2

POLICE COURT.

Before Captain Bowron and J. McGowan, Esq., J's.P.

Charge of Wouxdixg

Frederick Lough was' brought up, on remand, on a charge of wounding Arthur Innes, thereby causing him grievous bodily harm. Sergeant Gillies said that Mr Innes was still in the Hospital, and had not yet recovered consciousness. Under the circumstances, he would ask for a further remand for a week.

Mr Miller (who appeared for accused) offered no objection to the remand provided bail was enlarged. Remand granted as applied for, and bail enlarged. Breach of By-laws. John Peterson was charged with driving in Grey-street after dark without having lights to his vehicle. Sergeant Gillies said that on the night in question a Maori boy was knocked down in the street. Defendant was fined ss, with costs 7s. BbEACH.OF THE LICEXSIITG ACT. , Dorothy Fennell was charged with supplying liquor to a prohibited personi—Mary Rolton. Mr P. Fennell informed the Bench that his wife was dangerously ill, and could not attend. Sergeant Gillies said the case must be heard by the S.M. He would therefore ask for a remand. Remanded for a week. Alleged Assault.

Charles Rolton was charged with wounding Mary Rolton, and causing her serious bodily harm. Mr Clendon appeared for the accused and requested that all witnesses should be ordered out of court.

Sergeant Gillies said that on the ltith instant the accused and two men named Thompson and Smith were in the boat shed at Shortland, when Mrs Eolton came to the shed and used some words which apparently aggravated the accused, who took up a batten and beat her, causing serious injuries. Mrs Rolton was within a few weeks of her confinement.

Mr Glendon said he intended to admit the offence, but he considered there were sufficient extenuating circumstances to justify the Bench in dealing with the case summarily. Sergeant Gillies said he would place the evidence before the Bench, and it would be then for them to decide whether to deal with the case summarily, or to commit. He called John Thompson, boatbuilder, who deposed that he knew both Charles and Mary Rolton. On the 16th March he was with Henry* Smith in the boat shed at Shortland.. The accused and a young native lad were also there. While standingthere, Mrs Rolton came to within about five feet of the doorway, and used some words to her husband, but he did not catch what they were. He seemed to be aggravated, and, picking up a batten, made a run at her. Mrs Eolton fell down, but he could not say what made her fall. The batten was a piece of half-inch stuff about 4ft long. Accused then beat his wife with the batten, and broke it in three pieces while doing so. The blows were struck while she was on the ground. '1 he first blow was on the body, and the last one on her head. Somebody took possession of the batten, for when Constable Stapleton came it could not be found. The first stroke of the batten did not knock her down. Ho then went on with his work, and did not notice what else took place. To Mr Clendou: He had known Mrs Kolton for 10 years. On more than one. occasion, he had seen her under the influence of liquor.

Mr Clqndon was about to ask questions relative to Mrs Kolton's conduct on previous occasions, when Sorgt. Gillies raised an objection, which wub upheld by the Bench. Witness: Judging from what he saw, she was slightly inebriated. About half an hour previously, she had chased Rolton rouud the fish shops. He did not know whether the blow was accidentally or intentionally struck, whether the batten was sound before it was used, or whether Boltou had been drinking. Re-examined by Sergeant Cullies: The assault was committed iv the afternoon.

Henry Sraith, boatbuilder, was working with Thompson in the Shortland boatshed, about a quarter to five o'clock iv the evening, when Mrs Ilolton came to the shed and called her husband a "bastard." On her using this word, Boltou went out of the shea and followed his wife, who ran away

after using the word to him. \\f(tn Eolton fell down, and then the aooiwed

beat her with a batten, which t was broken. Accused did not knoclftvhis wife down. She went home diis|tly afterwards, but Eolton went to *jash his head, as he was hit with a brick.

Cross-examined: Mrs Eoltonjwas very much addicted to drink, and trfcen drunk used very insulting language. He did" not consider it was a serious assault.

Mr Glendon: Thompson said that when he saw Mrs Eolton fall, ho thought she had struck something, was that true ?

Sergt. Gillies objected to Mr Clendon telling the witness what a previous witness had said.

Mr J. McGowan, J.P, : Sergi. Gillies cannot dictate to Mr Clendon how he shall conduct his cross-exami-nation.

Witness : She might have struck herself on a brick when she'fell.- He knew Eolton had had considerable trouble with his wife in consequence of her drunken habits. There was a prohibition order against her now> Re-examined by Sergt. Gillies: There was nothing lying on the ground which Mrs Eolton could have struck, when she fell, except a piece of brick. To the Bench: Mrs Eolton threw a piece of brick at the accused after he had beaten her, which hit accused on the head. He did not know what became of the batten.

Dr. Oallan said at the request of tb c) police he examined Mrs Eolton on the 17th March. He found a scalp wound j on the top of her head about 2^ inches in length; there was also a contusion behind her left shoulder and another I below the left hip towards the buttock. There were no other injuries on her. The wound on the head was not serious. It had been inflicted within 24 hours previously. The edge, of a blunt batten would have made such a wound; it could not have been made by .her falling on a .brick. The wound j was Ton the crown of the head. ; ■: If it had been done in the act of falling the wound would have been on the side of the head. Mrs Eolton was in such a condition that the wonnds caused additional risk to her. I Cross-examined: Under certain ' conditions such a wound might have ' been caused by falling down. j Re-examined: Under the conditions as sworn to by previous witnesses, it was impossible the woman could have received the wound by falling down. Mary Eolton was called, but there was no appearance. Mr Clendon said that the Mary Eolton who had been called was $he wife of the accused, and could not be compelled to give evidence against her husband, as the Bench no doubt knew. '

Sergeant Gillies: She was subpoenaed to attend. Mr Clendon: What! in this tease.? Sergeant Gillies : No; in a previous one.

Mr Olendon : Which was adjourned. Probably Mrs Rolton has gone home. ■ Constable Stapleton said he saw Mrs Rolton at about 5 o'clock on the 16th March. Her head was bleeding. He saw the accused, and charged him with assaulting his wife by cutting her head, He denied it, saying that she had fallen down. He examined the cut on'the next morning, and decided to call in a doctor to look at it. He searched for, but could not find the batten. He saw the bruise upon Mrs Rolton's shoulder. ' Gross-examined: There had been trouble in Roltou's house through Mrs Rtlton's drinking habits. Though there was a prohibition order against her, she apparently got just as much liquor as when there was no order. Re-examined: The trouble through drink was not all caused through Mrs Rolton. Both she. And her husband were addicted to drink. »; This was the case for the prosecution.

Mr Clendon addressed the Court on behalf of the accused, contending that there was no case to go t© a jury and he asked the Bench to dismiss the case.

The Bench suggested that the case should be withdrawn, and that a charge of common assault should be laid. This having been done, the accused pleaded guilty. Mr Clendon addressed the Court, and submitted that the drinking habits of the wooaan Rolton had been provoking to the accused, who lost his temper; and chastised his wife. Her conduct was such; as to almost justify her husband in beating her. He asked that a small fine should be imposed. The Bench imposed a fine of £2 with costs £2 Is 6d. A month was allowed in which to pay the amount.