RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3343, 6 November 1873, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday, Novemuek 6. (Before I. N, Watt, Esq., R.M.) Brka<-Mas qy the Weights and Measures Act. —lolm Bunting was charged with having in his possession six pint pleasures, two half-pints, ami onc-half gill, all unstamped, contrary to the Act.—lnspector imou deposed to seizing the measures on the premises of accused.—Accused pleaded ignorance of the law, and was lined 10s and costs. A similar information against James Richmond was adjourned till Tuesday next. Keeping ax Unregistered Dug. —Michael Gorman, for this offence, was lined 40s and costs.

Assault. — Mary Ann Houlaghan charged Jane Myers with assaulting her. Mr Wilson appeared for defendant. Complainant stated that on Saturday last she was going from Mr Elson’s store in Walker street, with a cabbage in her hand, and passed defendant, who called her an “old hay-bag” and an “old cow.” Witness went into her own house, upon which defendant burst open the door and caught her by the hair, and struck her. In cross-examination, witness stated that she was a peaceably disposed women. Had been in a Police Court; before for an assault, and also for using abusive language, for which she was lined.—Elizabeth George stated that on the day in question she was talking to defendant, when plaintiff’ passed. Defendant, without any provocation, spat at

plaintiff, and called her a “ old hay-bag.” Plaintiff went into her house, and defendant followed, seized plaintiff and struck her. Witness separated them. Gross examined : Had known plaintiff for eighteen months, and always thought her a quiet person.—Defendant admitted the assault, but pleaded continual provocation from plaintiff.--His Worship thought that a slight assault had been committed, and lined defendant 40s. or seven days’ imprisonment, with hard labor, CIVIL CASKS. Dewar v, Wallace. -In this adjourned case the following evidence was takou : —James Campbell, proprietor of the Crown Hotel, stated that about twelve months ago he met defendant in Rattray street, who asked him to lend him L 5 to help pay his rent. Witness did so, and defendant seeing his landlord (plaintiff in this case) in the street, all three went over to Court's Hotel. Defendant paid plaintiff and got a receipt, and then said he would not be able to pay it again as cattle were coming through the fences, and that plaintiff had not fulfilled his promise to build dykes. Plaintiff answered that defendant could take away the fencing, and he would send a man to build the dykes as fast as defendant could cart the stone, and that he would reduce the rent. . Cross-ex-amined by Mr Stout: No particular fence was mentioned, but witness’s impression was that all of it was to be removed, but he had no idea as to what time it was to be done in. The three were together at Court’s for about an hour, but witness could only remember the few sentences he had asked. His memory was first refreshed as to their conversati n by seeing a case between the parties reported in the papers. Defendant spoke to him about the case since it was heard, but witness could not remember if it was more than a week ago. He could remember the exact words used by the parties twelve mouths ago, but couirl not recollect how many days ago his last conversation with defendant took place, —Mr Stout applied that plaintiff might be recalled to give rebutting evidence to that of last witness, which was granted; Mr Harris’s application to have defendant also recalled being overruled.—David Dewar, plaintiff, denied that he used the words at Court’s, as stated by Campbell. Cross-examined : Did not give defendant an unstamped receipt, or give him 10s to repay him for bringing him to town to get a proper receipt. Witness gave him 5s. —This closed the case, and his Worship, in delivering judgment, said he should not look at the case as a civil, but as a criminal one. In that shape, to substantiate the information it would be necessary to prove that the fences were taken down maliciously or wilfully, without right or license; in this ease such had not been shown, and the information would therefore be dismissed.