AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURT.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume V, Issue 456, 3 December 1880, Page 2

AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURT.

Tuesday, Nov. 30, 1880

Befoiie Justin Aylmer, Esq., RM.; II H. Fenton, Esq. ; and His Wobsiiiv

the Mayor,

ASSAULT.

Charlotte Wright was charged with assaulting William H. Rossi ter by throwing a bowl of boiling water over him.

Mr H. N. Nalder appeared for the pro-

secution. On behalf of defendant, Mr G. W. Nalder applied for an adjournment for a week, on the ground that within an hour of the sitting of the Court a fresh information had been laid charging the accused with an indictable ' offence. Defendant had had no oppor. tunity of providing herself with counsel, which would be necessary, to enable her to meet the fresh charge. i Mr 11. N. Nalder strongly opposed the .adjournment. He contended that the object of a summons was merely to secure the attendance of the accused person. That attendance being secured, defendant was not prejudiced by the information having been laid in another form. He quoted authorities to show that if, during the hearing of a case included in summary jurisdiction, the evidence went to show a prima facie case of a graver nature, the Bench were bound to committ. The Bench refused to grant an adjournment and prosecutor's counsel proceeded to state his case, and called the following

evidence:— W. Johnson, lemonade manufacturer, deposed that he was at Mrs Scarbrough's on November 24. Saw defendant there Mrs Scarbrough told him if he saw Rossiter before four o'clock, to tell him to

come round. Mr G. W. Nalder called attention to the fact that witness had sworn that this had taken place on the 24th. In answer to tlie Bench . witness stated' that he did not remember the date. To Mr 11. Nalder—' It was one day la t week, but I do not remember which.'' W. 11. Rossiter deposed that he was a watchmaker. On the 24th November saw the last witness, who told him that Mrs Scarbrough wanted to see nim. Went round there at once. Thought it was between ten and eleven, but was not sureSaw Mrs Scarbrough and a neighbor, but did not speak to her. Went to the back of Mrd Scarbrough's house, and saw defendant. Defendant said she wanted to speak a few words to witness. Then saw Mrs Scarbrough, who asked him to come into the house. Defendant said no, and suggested the wash-house, which was a separate building. Defendant and Mrs Scarbrough went into the wash-honso and he followed close. Defendant asked him what he wanted of Mrs Scarbrough. Said that was his business. Defendant then asked what he knew about Mrs Scarbrough. He replied "Me and Mrs Scarbrough understand each other.' Nothing more was said, and witness then received a bowl of boiling water right in bis face. Mrs Wright threw it. She dipped it out from the copper under which there was a fire. She throw it deliberately at bim. Witness must have dipped his head, as the bulk of tho water caught him just in the forehead. Had his hat on (hat produced). Ihe marks on it were caused by the water. • Said "Oh my God ! I'm scalded." Mrs Wright turned and dipped another dip from the copper and chased witness out ot the garden with it. Threw it after him, but did not hit him. Defendant came to the gate with Mrs Scarbrough. Witness was outside. Defendant sent Mrs Scarbrough for another bowl. The latter fetched it, and defendant took it from her. She came out with tho hat in one hand and the bowl of water in the other. She said, " Here's your hat." Witness said, "No you don't." She then threw the water out in the road after witness. Witness gave defendant no provocation whatever, madeuseotnoinsultinglanguage to either her or Mrs Scarbrough, Had a view to marrying her. Defendant was Mrs Scarbrough's niece. Mrs Scarbrough had considerable property. Tho Wrights were opposed to his (witness') visiting Mrs Scarbrough. By Mr G. W. Nalder—Before he came to Akaroa was in business in Cliristchurch. Did not succeed in business there.

Mr H. N. Nalder objected to the tone of cross-examination as irrelevant, and the Bench sustained the objection.

Cross-examination continued—Was paying his addresses to Mrs Scarbrough. Tho time for the marriage was fixed.

(Mr 11. N. Nalder again objected to the questions.)

Witness —" The water was boiling. It did not take my hair off."

At the request of defendant's solicitor, witness here removed the bandages which had hitherto enveloped his head.

Dr Guthrie deposed' that Rossiter had come to him about noon on tha 24th and complained of a scald. Dressed it for him. Found a portion on the forehead about tho size of a five-shilling piece, was a burn of the second degree—that is tho skin was blistered. On other parts of the face were burns of tbe first degree, causing' redness of the sldn. The water need not have been boiling to cause tho burns, but must have been very hot. Had the water gone into the eyes it would havo been likely to have damaged his sight. There was not much wrong with Rossiter now.

le would soon recover from the effects of he scald. By Mr G. W. Nalder—lf the water lad been boiling and had reached the hair t would have taken it off. ' This was the case. Mr G. W. Nalder said that in the summons served on defendant she was charged with having committed the assault on the 25th. There was no evidence that an assault had taken place on that day. Further there was no evidence that the water was boiling as was also alleged. The Bench stated that they had decided not to deal with the cas<j summarily. It would have to go to a jury. On the usual question being put, defendant, by the advice of her solicitor, declined to make a statement, and was committed for trial, bail being allowed, herself in £100> and two securities in £50 each. (Mr Aylmer here left tho Bench). abusive language. A charge of this nature had been laid against F. Arming. Prosecutor (W. li. Wood), now asked leave to withdraw it. The Bench allowed the charge to bo withdrawn, Mr Fenton at the same time expressing his disapproval of the practice. (Mr Aylraer here resinned his seat.) W. Rossitor was charged with making use oC abusive language to Mrs Scarbrough. Prosecutrix .wished to withdraw the eh arge. Mr 11. N. Nalder, for defendant, objected. If the prosecution declined to go on with the case, he asked the Bench to dismiss it. Case dismissed with costs and solicitorfee. cattle trespass. For this offence W. 11. Wood, G. Lardner, J. Harris, and C. Schubert were each _ned 5s and costs. VAGRANCY. Arthur Best, a boy of about fifteen, was ' brought, up on this charge. It appeared that the boy had left his home, which was stated to be somewhere ' about Geraldine, and was wandering aim-

lessly about Little River, where he was arrested by Constable Smart.

At the request of the police, prisoner was remanded for eight days, that his father might be communicated with.

CIVIL CASES. Okain's District Road Board v. J. Dalglish, claim £42, rent of Lo Bon's Ray jetty.

This case had been adjourned lot ihe evidence of: Mr J. B. Barker, who was chairman of the Beard at the time Mr Dalglish's tender was accepted.

Mr Barker was then sworn, and in answer to defendant stated that he had seen him (defendant) in Le Bon's Bay early in January. Defendant then told him that ho had received a letter from Mr Wright, mentioning an agreement about the jetty. As chairman had authorised the acceptance of defendant's tender and a letter notifying its acceptance.

By Mr Wright — The Board never authorised you (the Clerk) to get a stamped agreement. Considered your letter was sufficient to put defendant in possession of the jetty. The jetties in Okain's Bay and Littlo Akaioa, and in neither case had there been an agreement. Mr Dalglish again contended that the Board had no power to lease the jetties. Judgmeut reserved till Friday, Dec. 3. G. Hammond v. Gressier. Claim £33 17s 6d, share of contract for bush-falling. Mr H. N. Nalder appeared for the plaintiff. The court reserved judgment till Friday, Dec. 3. W. H. Wood v, John Riley (a Maori.) Claim £4 12s 6d. Judgmont for amount claimed with costs. • The Court then adjourned.