AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume V, Issue 507, 24 May 1881, Page 2

AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

Friday, May 20,

Before Justin Aylmer, Esq., R.M

J. Wright was charged with indecent exposure. He pleaded guilty, and expressed his sorrow. Under the circumstances, the Bench repremanded him and dismissed the case. C. Alger was charged with assaulting F. Halm by shaking his hands in his fnee. He pleaded not guilty. Mary Alger was also charged with using abusive language on the same occasion. Mrs Alger pleaded guilty to having used the words complained of. The plaintiff gave evidence of a general neighbors quarrel. Mrs Alger examined the plaintiff but elicited nothing fresh. J. Missen gave evidence of the row, and as to hearing Mrs Alger calling Hahn a police spy. He did not see Alger raise Ins fist as it was dark. G. Scott also heard the row, he had now heaid Missen's evidence which was substantially what took place. They were all talking and no one could hear what they _~id. Saw Alger shake his hands ir Halm's face. J. VVright was called for plaintiff, but admitted having a glass too much and could not tell what was said. The Bench requested him to stand down. U. Alger, the defendant, gave evidence as to the children of plaintiff annoying his children. His boy hr.d to he kept from school as he was always beaten by Hahn'a boy. The whole thing happened through the children. Mrs Alger gave evidence as to the general state of constant quarreling about the children. Sergennt Willis asked the permission of the Bench to state that Hahn had given no special information to the police in the recent assault case. The police simply summoned him as a witness. The Bench thought it was a neighbors' row, and that there were faults on both sides, and would suggest that a change of residence would be beneficial, and dismissrd the case against both parlies, the cosis of court to be divided. CIVIL CASES. E. Broucher v. D. l.ibeau. This case had been adjoured for the production of Mrs Broucher's evidence. Mrs Bioucher, on being sworn, gave evidence that she lent £7 in one sum last October to her brother, the defendent. She told a box for 25s to him. The entries of the transactions were made in a book by her husband. She afterwards lent the defendant lis. She did washing for him, ■he account for which was correct. She could aware defeudand owed her husband £9 4s sd. Examaniod by tho defeudand—l lent you the £7 in the house, I was not by myself. My sister was present. My sister is at present in Lyttelton. It was on Oct. 16 last I gave you the money. I did. not make a present of the box. 1 told you I wanted to be paid for the washing. By the Bench—My sister was in the kitchen when the money was borrowed. She was sitting down. Tho £7 was made up of one £5 and two £1 note.s. The entries were made in tho book the day ibe transaction took phce. The case was adjourned till June 3, to allow of Mrs Bioucher'a sister's evidence being taken in Lyttelton, and 3rouchor was also requested to have his father-in-Jaw in attendance. In the cawe of Kissel v. Cashmere, a claim of £1 13* 61 there was no appearance of either party. The Court then adjourned.