Untitled

Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 101, 6 May 1870, Page 2

LIBEL.—WHITAKER V. DE HIBSCH,

This case was resumed. James De flirsch was again called, charged by Frederick Alex. Whitaker with the publishing false and malicious statements regarding him.

Messrs. Rees and Joy for the prosecution. Mr. Wynn for the defence The defendant having been called, and not appearing, Mr. Rees informed the Court that he understood the defendant had left the colony, counsel for the prosecution was prepared to go on with the case and had all witnesses , present, but in the possibility of defendant not having left tho colony he would ask that a warrant should be issued for his appearance. Mr. Wynn had no doubt in his mind that defendant" was at present beyond the jurisdiction of the Court, unless perchance the City of Melbourne had got stranded on the coast; in point of fact he had gone on a visit to Europe and intended returning in the course of eight or nine months. Mr. Rees stated that had he known of the intention of defendant to leave the colony, he should have taken means to prevent him. His Worship thought he could scarcely have been prevented, seeing that he had been only charged on summons. Had he bean on bail it would have been different. However, if he returned inside of six yeai-s the ease could be taken up civilly. Mr. Rees then applied that the case should not be dismissed, but remain standing on the books. The Court suggested that it should be withdrawn for the present, which would not prevent its resumption in the same Court, or the removal of proceedings to the Supreme Court. Mr. Wynn applied that the case be dismissed. The Court held that the case, if dismissed on its merits, could not be again taken. In this case it could not be desmissed on its merits, for its merits could not be known, owing to the absence of one of the parties. At the present nothing could be done but dismiss the case. The case was then dismissed. BEBJUBY. William Smith appeared, charged by Edwin Lascelles with wilful and corrupt perjury. His Worship, in looking at the information, stated that there was really no charge of perjury in it, and dismissed the case. BBBACH OF CITY BOABD ACT. Robert Haywood was charged with refusing to pay the sum of £7 10s., alleged to be due for city rates. Mr. Wynn appeared for the complainant, and Mr. Joy with Mr. ftees for dafsndant. Mr. Joy applied for an adjournment, in order to enable Mr. Bces^to be present. The case proceeded. J. W. Diddams deposed : I am Collector of Rates for the City Board. I produce the Assessment Book for the first half .of 1870. Find the name of defendant here for property situated in Queen-street, estimated value, £200. The rate due at 9d. in the pound is £7 10s. I have demanded this, and it has been refused. To Mr. Joy: I have been a long time in this business ; I know the house in question ; remember seeing rats before Mr. Hayward came into possession ; I then had two separate assessments, one for High-street and one for Queen street. Since his possession I do not recollect if Mr. Haywood has paid in one rate for these two properties; always knew that I was claiming two separate assessments ; the full description, as given in the book, is the " Auckland Hotel entrance, Queen street." I know that this entrance is the iron gate leading to the back of the hotel; have also assessed the Auckland Hotel abutting on High-street. I know that this entrance, from Queen-etreet is not a public entrance. I-am claiming for that property occupied by Mr. Haywood, which abuts on Queen-street; it consists of an entrance and upper rooms, also fronting Queen-street; also portion of building occupied as a bar; I think these ro .ms fronting Queen-street is occupied as a biiliardroom. We are bound to take cognizanre of the houses abutting on each street. The £450 is the annual value of the Auckland Hotel, High street; £200 is the value of the Auckland Hotel, Queen-street. . I am the assessor I have assessed the property on its annual value. It is done by no clause that I am aware of. The aggregate value of the buildings is £650. This closed the case for the complainant. Mr. Joy addressed the Bench for the defendants, saying he would call witnesses, with the Bench's permission, to prove that several houses in Queen-street, the Greyhound and Exchange, which were exceptions to this rate, charged to the defendants. Mr. Wynn replied at some length for the plaintiff. Judgment deferred for a few days. BALSE PBETBNOES. John McGill was charged with obtaining 7s. 6d. by false pretences, and was remanded until Monday, in order to get the principal witness, who was at Onehunga. BBEACH OK PBOTECTION OF ANIMALS ACTS. A. Dornwell was charged with a breach of the above Act, by exposing, in his shop, one hen pheasant contiary to the provisions of the Act. Mr. Wynn appeared for the defendant, for whom he pleaded guilty, but stated that the bird was hung up in the shop in Mr. Dornwell's absence, and on being told it was against the law it was immediately taken down, and he would therefore ask the Bench

to dismiss the case, giving the defendant ai caution. T Mr. Naughton would object to anything but a dismissal, as the Act was a very stringent one. ,•;£ His Worship quite agreed with Mr. Naughton as to the stringency of the Act. Hia ; Worship hoped the clause of the Act would be published. H. Perkins was also charged with the same offence, and on the application of Mr. Naughton i both cases were adjourned until next Frii aa J' The Court then rose.