AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume VI, Issue 547, 11 October 1881, Page 3

AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Before Justin Aylmkr, Esq., R-M.

FbidXy, October 7, 1881

CHEATING HSTURBANQE AT GRAIN'S BAY. J. Bullock, T.. Ware, R. Hartley, VV. Hartley, G. Hartley, A Mason and N. Christiansen, of Okain's Bny, were> charged with using threatening atid insulting ianguajje at Okain's Bay, on , the 15th of September. . . The charge ngninet W. Hartley was -withdrawn, as tho police wished him to give evidence. The whole of the accused, however, acknowledged that they had been guilty of the- offence with, which they were chargedThe Bench eaid they would Ijke to hear something about, the case, and Sergeant Willis then explained that the disturbance liad taken place at a ball in Okain's Bay, when the defendants had not only thrown pepper on the floor, and made it necessary to wash it out, but had also made use of very bad language. He would call William Thacker to substantiate his statement. William Thacker deposed that an Oddfellows' ball was held at Okain's Bay on the 15th. When they were going into the ball-room it was discbvere.d,there was pepper on the floor. A number of young men had to set to work to clear it out before the ladies could come in. Several of the accused ran; into the hall and witness said, "You young pups if you don't clear out I'll take you to Akarb-i.* , They were very noisy and asked witness to come outside and take his coat off* but he told them he knew better than that, as 'he w,ould bring them to Akaroa.-• After the pepper was cleared away some of them threw dirty water into the room. Bullock and Ware were the two ringleaders. There was a good deal of larrikinism in Okain's Bay, and if it were not put a stop to soon, it would be necessary to have a policeman stationed there. About the Church on Sunday night it was a common thing to hear disgusting language used, and gates had been taken off their hinges and rails pulled down for a lark, causing a great deal of trouble and annoyance through the misting of cheep and cattle. He hoped the Bench would warn the accused.

The Bench said that it was a disgraceful thing that a respectable ball could not be held without such a disgusting exhibition of larrikinism. This unseemly behavour of some of the young men and boys was shameful, and must be put down with a strong hnnd. In Aknroa the other night, he understood that there had been a greal noise made in the hall during the time an entertainment was being held; as to the accused their conduct had been most disgraceful. He supposed the oldest of the accused called themselves men, but they were not worthy of the name, having behaved like stupid boys. They were & disgraceful set of young scamps, and be would fine them 10s and costs, or in default 24 hours hard labor. If they appeared before him again a very heavy penalty would be inflicted. The costs of the case which accused had to pay amounted to £4 9s.

CIVIL CASES. Robert Main v. B. Shadbolt. This case, adjourned from Tuesday last, was lesurned, Mr C. Henning appearing as before for plaintiff, and Mr Nalder for defendant. John Barwick, recalled by the Bench, said " When Mi Lee ordered me to take the dog to drive the sheep oat of the paddock he was off the chain." George Bryant said, I was present when he dog was shot. I knew it was Main's.

I never saw that dog kill a sheep or a lamb till I saw him worrying a lamb at the time he was shot. I never saw the dog worry a lamb before. 1 heard Charlie Everett say that he saw him worrying a lamb three weeks ago. I was with young Shadbolton that morning, but I did not see the dog worry a lamb. I saw a lamb taken out of a creek by young Shadbolt. I saw the dog and the lamb in the creek, the lamb waa net then dead. It was close to the stable. I went to Walsh'e that morning to borrow some cartridges to shoot a black and white dog that waa worrying some sheep up the creek. I am sure there was a blacK and white dog there, but I do not know whose it was. The black and white dog was, I think, between a sheep and cattle dog. I do not think I should know it again if I saw it. The lamb that was worried at the stable was three weeks old. The skin produced is that of tho lamb that wns killed near the stable. By Mr Henning.—l saw the dog when young Shadbolt pulled the lainbout of the j creek. It was then about 8.30 a.m. It was afterwards that I went for the cartridges. I did not say anything to anybody about it. I only borrowed the cartridges. I did not care about saying anything about it. ;■ By. Mr Nalder.—l swear I never said I would shoot any man's dog. I have no down on Robert Main, but I believe he has one on me.Mr Henning asked that further evidence might be called. The Bench asked what sort of evidence he wished to call. Mr Henning said he should like to call Mr-Lee, , who was expected with thocoaoh, And another witness, to prove the dog's movements on the morning in question. Hβ thought the evidence necessary to throw better light on the case.

Mr Nalder objected ; he said the clause in the Act was very clear on the point that any dog at large attacking orbiting sheep could be shot, and so the case should be dismiss d at once.

His Worship said he was not yet satisfied that the dog had been killing or worrying, and he would hear the other evidence, as he was not pleased with the testimony of some of the witnesses for the defence.

Wm. Close deposed. Saw the dog that morning near Shadbolt'n stables. It was young Shadbolt who said if he had a gun he would shoot the dog. Thia was about 8 a.m. Young Everett had told him a lamb had been worried that morning. Young Shadbolt told me distinctly that it was Mr Main's dog. He said nothing of its having worried a lamb. The dog was with my slut that was on heat there, he stopped with her all the time, till young Shadbolt drove him away. Mr Nalder said he would simply refer the Bench to the Act.

Mr Henning was ready to call Mr Lee, who was .expected by coach, to testify to the movements of the dog that day, if necessary. The evidence for the defendant was, however, of such a contradictory nature that he supposed it was almost unnecessary to call additional testimony for plaintiff. His Worship said he should like to reserve judgment in this case in order that he might look over the evidence. Judgment reserved accordingly. Win. Ford v. Alex. Claim £17 3s 6d. Mr C. M. Henninc for the plaintiff. This was a claim for labor. Plnintiff deposed he had worked for 343£ hours for defendant, cutting and thrashing grass seed at Is per hour, and had never received any payment.

By Defendant: You never gave me an older for the money, and I never got payment for the work in any-way. Plaintiff hero tumbled out of the witness box in s".ch a manner as to attract His Worship's attention who asked him if he were intoxicated. Plaintiff replied in the negative, but the Bench further enquiring where he had spent the night, he said in a most extraordinary manner that he had passed it in the bush " amongst the wild things." Plaintiff was then removed and locked up for drunkenness. The case was then proceeded with.

Jefendant, sworn, said that he paid plaintiff the money by order on his father and had his father present to prove it, as well as other witnesses Ford never asked for the money, but siid he should prefer an order on his father. • The bill, consisting to a great measure of an account for grog, was here produced in Court. Henry Mclntosh, sworn, said, My son gave Ford an order on me. It was an understood thing when Ford went to work for my son that he was to work out the debt that was owing to me. 1 By Mr Henning.—The books are kept by my .wife. They are not in my possession as I have sold my book debts to Mr Mcßeth of Lyttelton, and he has the books. A witness deposed that Ford sometimes talked very strangely when not under the influence of drink, being of a very excitable temperament.

Mr Henning asked for a verdict for the defendant. The man had worked hard and had a right to his money. He acknowledged owing some money to the defendants and would pay them. His Worship said defendants had their lemedy, and he would give judgment for plaintiff for fall amount and costs and solicitor's fee 21s. The accounts shown him were most difficult to understand, and the money charged for drink could not be allowed, Mr Henning having pleaded the Tippling Act. The Court then adjourned. SATURDAY, OCT. 8 Before Justin Aylmer, Esq., R.M".

William Ford brought up for contempt of Court for appearing on the previous day in a state of intoxication was dismissed with a caution.