Resident Magistrate's Court.

Clutha Leader, Volume II, Issue 63, 23 September 1875, Page 6

Resident Magistrate's Court.

• BALGJjtJTHAi 35th SEPTEMBER. ; '{QoCmmJ. P. 'Maitland, Esq., R. M.) . T. hochaw {Crown Land Ranger) v. JOHN tuck. •Wi Taylor,. Esq., fordefendant." 'Charge of illegal occupation of Crown Lands at Catlins River. '■"'', , .. ,•_,., , Case adjourned until Wednesday, the 1/th of November. • - r 'A police v. mes. -W. Taylor, Esq, appeared for defendant. Charge of illegally selling spirituous liquors on Sunday, loth August. t . '. „ . t Sergeant Finnegan requested that all witnesses in'the case should leave the Court. This re- j quest having been complied with, the Sergeant stated that defendant had been convicted upon a similar charge before, and from information received he helieved he fdefendant) waa selling a lor^o quantity of spirituous liquors. He then called ' Henry Fraaer, who stated that he, in company with' Wend others, waa at Tuck's place on Sundays 15th August, but- could not remember whether he had any grog, His" Wbrship here cautioned the witness. ffeb" witness again stated that he could not say fof -certainty whether be got grog in Tuck's hoase. He afterwards admitted having had some rum outside of the house, but did not see nnyone pay for it, and that the other witnesses conld speak for themselves. Bis Worship again reminded the witness of his* obligation, and told him that unless he would tell tbe truth that he should put the law in force and make him. He further stated that it ■waVaVi unpleasant position for any man to be placed, «i but -when in the witness-box in a Court of ;Tufcfcice, it was imperative that he should speiW ihe truth and nothing but the truth. Witness' again stated that he could not remember whether any of the others got grog. He alsn stated that he drank the best part of a bottle of'runi wbenhewas on the Beach, thinking it w*s porter, hence the cause of his oblivion. Thopias Lanzlauds stated that he did not know irhaA he did when at the beach on the 15th August. He was so drunk that Mr M'Pherson dejfred-him ,nofc to leave home that day as he was tboilnmk, and would only waste his money. He was in Tuck's house on the day in question, b«*Vn's too drunk to know what he did. " His Worship -It is no use to ask that witness any further questions. , „., . ;, Witness— Your Worship, T have told the truth fully. I was once aJ. P. myself in Victoria, but am now a disgrace to my friends. . Alexander Baird stated, he and some six others ware at Tuck's on the 15th August. They did not cet-any' drink- from Tuck. He (witness) bought a bottle of rum at Sutherland's and took it toTuck's house, and which he (witness) gave to the others to drink. They got some food when there but was sure Tuck supplied no grog. His Worship stated that the evidence was very unsatisfactory ; he had his own opinion of the* case, and which he should not venture to give utterance to ;he would be afraid ; but he wished those witnesses to know that if further evidence be brought up that they might yet be called upon to answer something of a more serious nature than that of to-day, and if such be -the case, that they would get the full benefit of the law. He then dismissed the case, and hoped that it would be a warning to defendant, and that he would seek some other mode of livelihood. ' . ' Defendant stated he was desirous of starting his own business (butchering) again, if he could pet a slaughtering license, and that he intended to apply jfor one. Knee v. Jackson. Claim of £2 8s for an iron band, made to the order of defendant for the hog mast of the steamer " Baiclutha." Defendant stated that he did not order a new haqcL' but merely instructed plaintiff to weld the old one. Plaintiff was nonsuited.