RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 144, 10 November 1870, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before W L. Simpson, Esq., U.M., and Alex. Stewart, Esq. J P.) Thursday, Notembee 3.

Whitnall v. M'Rae.— M'Rae (Miss) was charged with having, on the 20 .h ult., ridden over the plaintiff on Waitahuna road, thereby injuring him. Mr. Gooday for plaintiff ; Mr. Copland for defendant.

Mr. Copland stated that as the plaiutiff was a boy, it was usual to ha\ r e some friend joined with him in the action, as if he was cast in any expenses, they would be able to recover them.

After a few remarks, the case was proceeded with

The evidence of the plaintiff went to show that on the day above mentioned he was in Lawrence giving evidence in an action against the father of defendant. On his w.iy home near the flaming, hs was knocked down by defendant's horse. He endeavoured to get out of the way, but, as the horse was galloping, he did not succeed. His side and thumb were injured thron^h tlie fall. On next morning his side was discoloured and painful. , The evidence of Mr. Grundy went to show that, on the day in question, defendant passed him on the Waitahuna , road at full speed, He said the horse

knocked down the Doy. The horse appeared to be under controul. Defendant did not stop to see what injury was done to the boy. He saw the boy get up after one or two attempts. He went to de- { fendant's house, and saw her sitting on the same horse before her father's door. The horse seemed to be quiet. He noticed one of the girths broken. He said to defendant that she had better go and make some apology to the boy, which she did not do ; she merely asked if he was much hurt. I heard her say that if she got a hold of him she would give him a hammering. Mr. Chalmers' evidence went to show that he saw the boy knocked down, and a horse galloped past him at full speed ridden by a lady. He did not recognise the defendant. He was told it was Miss M'Rae. The evidence of Mrs. Fraser corroborated the evidence of former witness. For the defence, Mr. Copland produced the saddle exactly as it was when defendant arrived at her father's house. The horse she was riding was a fiery one. The girth having broken, and napping about its legs the animal was not amenable to control, and consequently took : frte charge. < Mr. J. M 'Rae's evidence went to shdw : that when Miss M'Rae left Clark's house, ] Clarks Flat, the girth wa3 whole. He < was riding along with Fiss M'Rae, and, i shortly after starting, the horse of de- 1 fendant took the lead and disappeared < round a corner. As he knew the horse ] was fiery, he feared that he had bolted. 1 He tried to make up to her, but could : not. He did not even see her until he i arrived some time afterwards at her father's house. He noticed the broken 1 girth, and had no hesitation in saving that < it was the cause of the horse taking full i command. < Mr. Copland elicited from the witnesses ( that Miss M'Rae did not threaten to ] hammer the boy until he expressed him- ( self in an impudent manner towards her. 1 The Bench, after consultation, re- i marked that from the whole evidence there was a doubt on their minds, and i they would sjive the defendant the bene- i fit of that doubt. They could not think i that any lady would be so hardened as to i do wilfully what had occurred in this i case. They would, therefore, dismiss the f case, each party paying own expenses. i Ah Win? v. J. Fisher —Fisher was t charged with having, on Wednesday, the c 2nd November current, assaulted him in f his own house, Tuapeka Flat. i From the evidence, it appeared that, ( on the arrival home of plaintiff, he found f defendant drinking in his house along I with his wife. They were the worse of < drink. He scolded his wife for what she c was doinof, upon which she flew on him, i and caught him by the hair, the defend- t ant doing likewise. The defendant took < hold of a tomahawk which was lying on a i block beside him, and was in the act of f striking him when a Chinaman in service < of plaintiff wrenched it out of his hand. 1 In the scuffle, the defendant was thrust £ out of the house. } The defendant acknowledged that he 1 was drinking with plaintiffs wife, but he £ endeavoured to. excuse himself by stating i that he was a kind of a friend of the < plaintiff, he having often been sent for < to keep the store whilst plaintiff was i away, and that he merely stepped be- } tween plaintiff and his wife tv stop him i from beating her, as he was doing so un- i mercifully. ' * The d'fendnntboreunmistaeakeableevi- < d nee of having escaped scatheless from the melee. The Bench, after administering a severe reprimand, fined him in 20s. and costs of Court, or seven days imprisonment.