MAGISTERIAL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1577, 6 June 1887, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

ASHBURTON— MONDAY.

(Before Mr H. Friedlander, J.P.) DRUNKENNESS. A man who had not been before the Court for some years was fined 5s and coata for having been drunk m East street. , An elderly man named John Moorhead, charged with having been drunk and disorderly, was fined 40a and costs with the alternative of seven days' imprisonment^ The Bench informed Moorhead that if he were brought up again within six months he would not have the option of a fine. ESOAPEES. Three boys named David Fogarty, Bobert Seymour, and William Price, who escaped from Barnham Industrial School about a week ago, and who had be'en found m the river bed, were brought up, the police asking for an order of recommittal to the school. One of the boys said that he had run away because he wanted to see his mother, who lived m Timaru . The order asked for by the police was made, the Bench warning the boys against running away again. REMANDED. A man who had been arrested last night was brought up on a charge of lunacy, but on the application of the police was remanded till to-morrow that he might bemedically examined. (Before Mr H. Friedlander J.P., and Mr ft. A^corn, J,P.) a'ssatAt. Richard Adams charged Samuel Brown with having assaulted him. There wbb a cross- action, Brown v Adams,— Mr Oathbertson appeared for Adams, and Mr Crisp for Brown. —The evidence of the former was to the effect that he was riding on the Beach Road on Saturday when he overtook Brown, who was walking beside his dray. After a conversation m reference to a disputed account, Brown applied a rather opprobrious epithet to witness, and the latter returned, the compliment; Brown then without giving any notice of his intention, struck witness a number of times, knocked him off his horae, and when he was on the ground continued striking him till pulled off. — In crois examination the witness admitted having struck Brown after he had been pulled off. He had not struck him prior to this, he had no chance ; all the blows subse quently struck by witness were m selfdefence. — 0. Craddock and J. Charlton stated that they were driving up the Beach Road on Saturday when they saw Brown rush across at Adams and strike • the latter, who fell off his horse. Brown kept him on the ground and continued punching him till pulled off. The fight was resumed Bubsequontly, and then each of the men was as bad as the other — i Samuel Brown, m defence, stated that he had been first struck by Adams. He ' returned the blow and then Adams got off his horse and a stacd up fight enaaed. Adams got the better of the " first round " and got witness down ; m the " Becond round " the position of affairs was reversed and wttnesß got Adams down. It was m the second round that the previous witnesses arrived on the scene. — As a con- ' sequence of the witness's cross-examination by Mr Cathbertson, C. Craddock and J. Oharlton were recalled and they swore poaitivoly that Adams had not been on hie feet from the time be got off his horße till Brown was pulled off I— The case against Adams was dismissed and m that against > Brown, the defendart was fined £1 and costs. — Mr Ouihbertaon applied for profesi aional costs against Brown. — Mr Orlsp op--1 posed the application, and as the result of a difference of opinion between the presiding Justices no order was made, though* Mr Friodlandec said he was decidedly or* opinion that Brown, ahauldpay all the costs.— Under these circumstances Mr Outhbertson applied for half the amount of the fine to be paid to '. Adams. — The application waß granted. Dudaon v Fergus.— -Mr Crisp for de- ! fendant. — This was another aotion for i assault, but the plaintiff falling to establish his case It was dirasfssed; The Court then rose.