A PECULIAR CASE

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1807, 5 April 1888, Page 2

A PECULIAR CASE

At the R.M. Court this morning David Kennedy, a labouring man, sued John Henry, the licensee of the Commercial Hotel for the sum of £6 9a 6d, money whioh he alleged he had placed m the ' hands of Henry, but had not received baok again. Mr Gnthbertson appeared for the' plaintiff and Mr White for the defendant. The faots of the oase were eomewhat peoullar. The plaintiff glibly recounted the particular, of his olatm, but m cross-examination gave some rather queer evldenoe. He said that on Monday the 19th lost, he went to Henry's Hotel about eleven o'olook at night. He had £10 16s In a cheque, notes, gold and silver. He remained about an hour m the bar and spent about ten or twelve shillings. Mr Henry showed him to bed. When witness was taking oft his boots Henry came ln to the room and struok him on the head, Henry then sashed out of the room. Witness called to him to stand but he wonld not do so, and witness put on his boots and followed him to see what he had been struck for. There were two or three others In the bar. Aftef an altercation witness made it up with the defendant. He had some more drink and got Intoxicated. Before galng to bed the second time witness gave the cheque to Miss Henry, but did not get hia change. Tho next morning witness found that he had only £3 10a. Asked Henry where the cheque was. He said that he had given witness the change, and told him to dear ont. — By Me White : Gave the oheqne to Miss Henry before he wenT'to bud the second time, Had not a dear remembrance of what coourred after going to bed the first time, Did not leave the room after going up the second time, till four or fivo o'olook next day. Had never brought a similar aotlon against hotelkeepere ; had never brought an aotlon for money whioh he said he had placed ln their hands and not received back again. The witness reiterated that he remained In his room from about four o'clook on the morning of the 20th till about 5 o'olook on the afternoon of the same day. In reply to another question by Me White! the plaintiff ealdhe remembared Mrs Henry oountlng him out some money on the morning of the 20th — early In the morning- He waa then asked how he reoonolled this statement with hie previous one that he was m bed all day. He then sa'.d that by " early morning" he meant about 5 o'olook m the evening/ as he had been m bed all day. The witness denied all reoolleotlon of any money having boen given him on the morning of the 20th; .

Mr Whit?, la openlngjthe oaae for the ■defence, indicated the eyidenoe he would lead. The plaintiff, so far frcm being assaulted by defendant, was himself the aggressor, and It had been necessary to pat him oat, bo he did not sleep at the hotel at all, Tt was not possible for him to have given the oheqae as he alleged to Miss Henry, as she was away that night t»t a ball. On the following morning he came into the bar with a mate ; had some drinka and tendered the oheqae, shange for which was obtained from the Batik and glvea him, a faot which there were witnesses to prove. The oase was a tramped up one. Mr Ou .hborteon Baid that he would withdraw from the case if the faots were as stated by Mr White. His instructions were altogether misleading. Mr White naid he would rather the case went on* His olient was a botelkeeper and it was moßt necessary that there should be nothing against him. It was possible, too, that his olient might take farther steps m the matter. Mr White then led evidence as follows : — Andrew Graham, dyer at the Ashburton Woollen Factory, weot into the bar at Henry's between 10 and 11 o'clock on the morning of the 20th. The plaintiff was there and a man who appeared to be his mate. The plaintiff was kicking up a bother about the change of a oheqae, Mr Henry told him he would have to wait till the Bank was opened, A few minutes after someone oame m with the change, which Mrs Henry gave to plaintiff, cix or seven notes and some silver. He seemed dlsaatlsfiad, and Mrs Henry called her husband who oounted the money to plaintiff. Plaintiff then oounted over the money put kt m his pocket and went oat.— John Henry, tha defendant, said that the man shouted four drinka on the evening of the 19th. He gave witness half a sovereign and witness returned 8s change. The man was drunk j when he oame into the house. Witness gave him a soda as his drink. Witness got him to his room and asked for the price of the bed baoause he did not think he would get it if he allowed it to remain, fa response th» plaintiff grappled with him and half ohoked him- Witness to get away struck him. Witness then went | downstairs and a minute or two afterwards the plaintiff came down too. After generally misbehaving himself, the plaintiff was pat oat of the hoqsu, Only witness and his wife were at home that evening, his daughters being away at a bull. The next morning about nine o'clock, Kennedy's cheque was brought to witness, Witness told him ho would have to wait till Uie bank was open. Witness corroborated Graham's evidence as to what subsequently occurred. Mr Oathbortson at this stage said he would take a nonsuit. Hifl instructions had entirely misled him; The Maglatrate nonuulted the plaintiff with goitf uraoaDtlnp to £3,