RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 147, 1 December 1870, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before W. L. Simpson, Esq., 8.M.?

Wednesday, November 23.

Leslie v. Ryan.— "Ryan- was clia"gecl with having, on the 14th November, violently assaulted Mrs. Leslie by striking her on the head with a loaded whip. The evidence went to show that on the day mentioned, the plaintiff and his wiio were going home to Waitahuna from Lawrence, "that on the road the accused made up to Leslie and his wife, who were in a cart with their children A few words were exchanged, which, ultimately ended in blows ; one of the blows intended for Leslie fell to the lot of his wife. The blow was a severe one, causing insensibility for a short period. She vras taken to the Hospital, where she remained for one week. The evidence went to show that there was no malice •■or ill-will existing between the parties, and that it was one of those little affairs which frequently take place betwixt neighbours Mr. Ryan's character was spoken of highly. Mr. Copland, 'at the commencement of the case, asked the Bench to reduce the charge agpi.ist the accused to the lesser one of common assault, so that the Bench could summarily deal with the case.

Upon hearing the evidence, the charge agaiiut the accused was changed, as asked for, into that of a common assault, to which the defendant pleaded guilty. The Magistrate, after considering the whole evidence, fined the accused in the sum of £10, costs of Court, and three witnesses. The prosecutor declined rereiving anything for himself. Failing payment,, two mouths' imprisonment with hard labour.

Another charge preferred against Ryan, for assaulting the prosecutor, was withdrawn by the police.

TrtunsDAi', November 2 k (Before the same Magistrate.) Herbert and others v. Walsh. — Amount paid into Court. Keen v Lawi\nee Corporation. — Mr. Gooday for the plaintiff, and Mr. M'Coy for fcho defenoo. This was an adjourned

iii-i Worship having reviewed, with great perspicuity, the decisions quoted by counsel on both side 3, non-suited tho plaintiff with cost 3.

M®sday, JSToy. 28.(Before the same Magistrate.)

Taylor v. Drury. — This was a case of interpleader. Mr. M'Coy appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Gooday for the defendant. Drury had obtained a judgment against John Taylor who, at the same time, was largely indebted to the plaintiff, Andrew Taylor. He (John Taylor) transferred his property, which consisted almost entirely of timber cut in the bush, to the plaintiff in part payment of his debt, and was working out the re3t as servant to the plaintiff ; and when a distress warrant was issued on Drury's behalf, it was found that he had so transferred his property. The object of this case was to determine the boiui fides of the transaction, and to whom the property now belonged. Mr. M'Coy, in addressing the Bench, said that at common law every man had a right to dispose of his property as ho pleased. The fa'rst obstacles to this bein°the 13th Eliz. c. 5, and 27th Eliz. c. •£ These, however, referred only to fraudulent conveyances, or alienations as against creditors and purchasers ; and such an alienation as the present, if made in good faith, could not be up3et at all, and whether fraudulent or not, could only be upset in a Bankruptcy Court. His Worship expressed a wish to see the books of the plaintiff.

Mr. M'Coy said that their production was unnecessary to support the transaction, as the smallest consideration, provided it did not shock the conscience, was .sufficient, and he was prepared to prove such a consideration without the books ; but as Mr. Andrew Taylor courted enquiry, being confident in the fairness of his position, he would make no opposition to an adjournment for their production. The case was accordingly adjourned till Thursday (this day.)

Wednesday, November 30. CBjfore the same Magistrate.) Police v. North and Ballaston.— North and Ballaston were charged with having, on the 26th November, in their possession a quantity of mutton for which they could not satisfactorily account. Mr M'Coy appeared for North. His explanation was that when hunting wild pi«s they came across some wild sheep, and took them. Ballaston's explanation was that he thought lie came rightly in possession of the meat. He could not tell from whom he bonght it. The explanations not being satisfactory to the Bench, the accuasd were sent to prison for one month with hard labour.