TAURANGA R.M. COURT

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume V, Issue 421, 23 September 1876, Page 2

TAURANGA R.M. COURT

Wednesday, September 20, 1876

(Before Herbert W". Brabant, Esq,, R.M.)

John Ross was charged, on the information of Alfred Faulkner, with selling a bottle of rum to Christopher Faulkner, without a licence, on the 26th August, at Katikati.

Mr Quintal appeared for the defendant, who pleaded not guilty. There was no appearance of the informant when the case was first called, but the defendant expressed bis willingness to wait until the other oases before the Court were disposed of, to Bee if the informant would attend.

After the other cases were heard, the infor.mant appeared, and the case was proceeded with.

Alfred Faulkner deposed j On the 26tb August Christopher Faulkner and two or three men of the A.O. Foroa were drinking at Ross' house at Katikati, and that he bad sent word over to his brother, Christopher Faulkner, to buy a bottle of rum and bring ifc over to him* The rum. was brought, and was sealed up by witness in the presence of his brother and two or three of the Constabulary. By Mr Quintal : He kept; an. hotel. He was not in Ross' house at the time the drinking was going on. Ris brother did nofc stop at his house. Ross' house was about; half a mile from his. He knew of the drinking at Ross' from a native constable who passed by the house and oame and told him. Christopher Faulkner was not at his house before he went to Ross*.. He had not seen the bottle of rum bought or sold. He did not know whether Mr Ross was at homo or. away- that day. Hd supposed if the rum was sold by Boas' man it was all the same..

By. the Oourt : The bottle of rum -produced* in Court was the one purchased'; it contained. rum. ; . , ..-,.„

Christopher Faulkner deposed v He hadhad a drink or two at Ross' house on j the day in question, and. had purchased the bottle of rum from Ross' man ;.he had-afterwards taken-i it to his brother, Alfred Faulkner's house. He hud known grog to be Bold at' the-bousfr-previously by Robs. .

Mr Quintal objeoted to the • last remarks male by witness, as it did ■< not apply* to theease. • v - .

By Mr Quintal: It was between 3 aad 4'o'olook in the afternoon when be was at Boss' house on the 26th. Tnere "were some'nativespresent. Pat, BosV man/, was also there* He did not see Boss there. Pat sold him the • rum. He knew Pat was in Ross* servicebecause he was in charge of the place. . He-* saw Rosa jual after he bought the bottle of 1 ' rum. He did not tell Ross he bad bought the rum. He did not know whether Ross knew the rum was bought. Was in the house about half an hour. He believed the bottle pro* dueed was the one he had taken over. He did not taste what was in it when he bought it. His brother was in the bar of his houae when he delivered the bottle to him.

By the Court: Rosa kept; a store. He did not know who, sold in it as it was the-firsfc time he bad been there. He believed it belonged to Ross. The rum wag brought out of a small room.

Mohi Horua, a constable in the A.O; Force, and Pori Kapa aud Matua, natives residing: at Katikali, also gave evidence for tb°. proße* oution similar in substance to thatQ&^revious" witness. They distinctly stated-^nWthe rum had been purchased from the man Fat.

Constable Whelan deposed to .serving tha summons on defendant, who had admitted that the store was his. Boss had also said that it was his man who had sold, the grog to Christopher Faulkner.

In reply to the Court?: Defendant denied that the rum was sold. on his behalf,

Mr Quintal asked the Court to dismiss theoase, as it had clearly been shewn that the grog had been sold by the man Pat without the knowledge of the defendant.

The defendant made a atatemenb to the effect that he had never given any one any authority whatever to sell rum on his behalf, nor had he ever authorised Pat to sell grog for him. £Te was away from the store at the time the rum was sold for which he was charged. The Court dismissed the information, as ifc had' not been proved that the liquor had been sold on behalf of the- defendant or by his consent. Jacabsohn v. Te Whareiro : Claim £9 3s. Defendant was not present, but had ad 1 mitted the debt. Judgment for plaintiff for amount olaimed and coats. Home and Beid v. W. H.. Wakeh'am t Claim £25, amount of dishonoured promissory note. The defendant did not put in an appearance. Judgment for plaintiff's and costs. ■John Beady v. Michael Hannon : Claim £38 6a lOd for wages j amount of a judgment summons. Mr Quintal appeared for the defendant. The plaintiff admitted having received a notioe of the bankruptcy of the defendant, and that the debt sued for was contracted before he received the nofcioe. The plaintff asked for an adjournment, as his solicitor was unable to attend. 'he Court adjourned the case until the following morning, by consent of the defen* dant. ' Three other debt cases were struck out, as neither of the p.arties in either case appeared. Thursday, September 21, 1876. John Kealy v; M flannon •• An adjourned case from the previous day. Mr Hawkins appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Quintal for the def-noe. The defendant was placed in the witness box and oroß9"examf.ied ab some length by Mr Hawkins relative to the position of Tiis bankrupt estate and hie ability to pay tie plaintiff. In reply to Mr Quintal : Defendant stated 'that he had not acquired any property since he had filed his schedule The Counsel on both sides having summed upj The Court was of opinion tha*. nothing had been elicited to oblige the Court to make an order of commitment. There w%B" nothing to show that the judgment debtor had any means of payment, or that he had in any way concealed any property. Mr. Hawkins applied for an adjournment of. the case sine die, but the Court declined to alter it's dooision.-

Penny v Hbrne and Raid : Noti^wf appeal, Mr. Quintal was informed by the Court that a bond to the amount of £20 had been entered into by Mr Penny and two others at Opotiki.

Mr. Quintal objected that the bond bad not. been executed within three days from the date of judgment (the 6th August) as pre^ scribed by law. The bond was signed on the 11th of August, ' . His Worship explained thafrMrFdnny had had an opportunity to execute the bond within the proper time if he had wished. He had no desire to place aray obstacle in the way off an appeal, but under the circumstances the bond must be considered invalid.

The native Kingi- was brought up on remand, and the case resumed, in which he was oharged- with stealing a bridle, . saddle, and blanket from Hori Tupaea. Sergeant Russell deposed that ho arrested i the prisoner on the 7th September, at Maketu, . and found the stolen articles in his posession. The prisoner escaped from custody during the night" with the handcuffs on ; with tha ■* .assistance' of natives, the witness - found the prisoner next day j D arua at Waipumaka.. The oh sin of the handcuffs was severed as if with some sharp instrument; he brought the ■ prisoner baok to Mokptu- and straight on to . Tauranga. He had found the horae ridden ' by prisoner outside Ihaka's whare at Maketiu Prisoner had told him the horse was his own. The prisoner denied knowing, anything of the robbery at Hori Tapaea-s house, and said that the saddle, bridle, , and blanket were his = own, and where he got them. The prisoner had no witnesses to call. " After adjourning one- hour, the Court re>sumed at two o'clock. ,

A . third, charge was brought against the prisoner for stealing one blanket from . Matu»tauri, a native residing at Hairini. Prisoner pleaded'not guiltyi ' The informant gave evidence as to a blanketbeing missing from hia whare, and to his bus*-

pecking the. prisoner; He identified ablanket produced 1 in Court as his, but being crossexamined by the- Oourfc, he was unable to definitely, state why he recognised it,, except that it was the only one of the description at the ttore where he bought it.

In reply to the Court, Sergeant 1 Russell stated Uiat the blanket produced was found on the prisonerwbenhe was arrestedi Two other natives also gave evidence in the case, and the prisoner- made a long statement. - The, prisoner was remanded until Friday morning/afc ten o'clock. Uoani =Hoete and .Te Kepa were separately charged by Sergeant Buaßell with cutting the handcuffs off the prisoner Kingi at the Mine of his escape from MaketuvMr Quintal appeared for both the accused. {-The case waa- adjpurned until Friday morning. Phidat, September 22, 1876.. Robert Home v. J. Montgomery : Claim £80 Is 6d, for commission for Belling the Masonic Hotel,. Tauronga. Mr Hawkins appeared for the plaintiff. The defendant did not appear. Judgment w«B' given for* the plaintiff by default for the full amount and costs. - The Court allowed immediate execution to issue, as the defendant was leaving the district. .:Te Kepa and Hoani Hoeti were brought up on remand charged with outting the handcuffs off the prisoner Kingi at the time of hia-escape from Maketu. ■ ' ■ Mr Quintal defended both the accused, yrhn pleaddd not guilty. charge against Te Kepa was first heard. Hearing this case occupied the Court some hours. Sergeant Russell, Akuhatu Tupaea, and Kingi gave evidence for the prosecution, Kingi pointed out the accused as the men who had cut his handcuffs with an axe. Kingi underwent a severe cross-examination by the counsel' for the aoousedand the Court. The Court was of opinion that the offence under the act charged had not been proved, but that an indictable offence bad been proved. The information was therefore dismissed, and the Court directed Sergeant Russell to lay another information against the prisoners for tbe indictable offence, and to produce the other parties- that appeared by the evidence to be implicated.. Eingi was het"e brought up to receive sen* tence — On the first and second charges, for horse stealing, and stealing the saddle, bridle,, and blanket, he was committed for trial at the Supreme Court. The third oharge against him, for stealing a blanket, was die< missed. On the application of Mr Hawkins, the Court granted a warrant; against J. Montgomery on behalf of Hobert Horneand Wrigley and Bon (the latter summons for £81 15 6d hai not been served, as the defendant was cob to be found), as an affidavit was made that the defaadaut was übout to leave tbe colony. Tue warrant only to be served within tbe district.