RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3411, 27 January 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

■Tuesday, January 27. - Before J. Brown, Esq., and JV’Hack. Esq., J.Ps.) ’ Drunkenness.:— Henry Cross was fined os, in default twenty* four hours’ imprisonhours’ i>6ter oUnft lOs.or forty height

- Assault on Two Chinese James War* ren was charged with having, on‘tho 25th •January, assaulted Ah Chong and also Ab Sing —Mr; Joyce.r.who .appeared for the aocused, asked for a remand till Thursday. Bail to any amount would be found by respectable persons. He had übt had time' to confer with his client.-Sub-luspector Mallard said the prisoner bad been apprehended yesterday afternoon, and had therefore had time to obtain legal advice. The po'ico had summoned the interpreter and all their witnesses, and were fully prepared to proceed with the charge.—Mr Joyce answered that it was :some i time before prisoner had time t» see.ffiis employer, and it was then that.he was advLed to see a lawyer. -The Sub-In-speetor said the assault was a very serious one, and Dr Brown was in attendance for tbe purpose of proving its nature. Perhaps the learned counsel for the prisoner would hear the evidence of the prosecutor, and if he then 'bought it necessary to ask for a remand the police, would acquiesce'in that application.'— .vlr -Joyce replied that he had not had time to speak to the prisoner. As to the witnesses who were summoned, they might be in attendance to-morrow. -4: Mr • Black. asked if Mr Joyce would hear the ,evidence for the police if it would nob enable him to make a better deence.—Mr Joyce : No; of course not. We Would have no opportunity of examining the witness ss. . Tile charge could not be so serious,-as it was- a summary conviction cose.—The Sub-Inspector saitl that the case, although only under a summary con-, victionWing, might, jnerge {into a.diiierenV shape. The poor man had been brutally assaulted^—The .prisoner ~was. ,remanded till next day.—The Sub-Inspector asked for expenses of witnesses.--Air, Black said nf course they would fee allowed.—-Mr Joyce said such a thing was, never, before heard of.* It was only in civil cases when adjourned that . expenses of witnesses were allowed.—Mr Black did not want to elicit the facts of the .case, but he would wish to know if the charge Was likely'to be one of a savage assault.—The Sub-Inspector having replied that it was, prisoner was admitted to bail in his pv/n recognisance of L2O and two sureties of tl() each. ’ '

Bye-law Case. Edward Devine, .driver .to Messrs Cobb and Co., was charged, with driving a coach and . six hqrsea . aroßnd the corners, of High; and Princes and High and Maase stieets at other than - a walking pace.-r Inspector Nimon said that on serving, the- ; ssummons on defendant^.. in Messrs Chaplina yard, Devine had used, bad lan-■ guage , to him, while the other 'men ; there laughed, at it.—For tbe; defence it ;-was contended that it was impossible to., pull up either a four or sixkorse coach at a.street: coriier.—The charge . was brought in consequence of somp c.aes, recently heard before the Court, when the Justices 'Occupying tho Bench instructed the Inspector to.proceed ; against the. coach drivers when .infriqging, tbo bye-laws, notwithstanding' an explanation which was made sho wing chat leave had been given to the coach proprietors by the Mayor to do so ; the cabmen pointed out by, those.iustruc.tlons that injustice was done ,to them.—The Bench said that \iO some extent permission had been apparently.giveu to the: coach proprietors to drive roqnd the. street corners,- but still it was. imposiible.to override the laws, which were, expiioit enbugb,' They were not there to,,make the laws, but: to use; them. , Defendant having been caiitioned to be mpre careful iri future, was fined is and costs.

(Before J. P. Maitland, Esq., R.M.)

. .THE LOSS OP THE SUEAT, ’ ] ■ The hearing of the charge against Captain Johnson was continued this morning., At the commencement of the proceedings, his Worship intimated to Mr Stojitthat he had considered the pqint that gentleman had raised at Ihst sitting as to the. -captain’s evidence at the Official Inquiry, and was of opinion that it was .clearly admissible against him.-—Hobertson was examined by Mr (Stout as. to certain statements ho had made in giving his evidence, more especially, with re-, ference to the question of the captain’s being intoxicated, The witness appeared to have answered .at the.. Inquiry rather vaguely,, for Mr Stout elicited to-day that he had; said-come;cthings because iie .V was pressed for an answer,”—Ueorge Henry Lodge, carpenter on board the Surat, was examined by Mr Haggitt, but nothing novel was slieited, the evidence being nearly a repetition of that given by him at the Official inquiry,—William Hargreaves remembered a steamer (the’Wanganui) coming into sight the morning after the vetsel struck; - Whin witness asked the captain to signal her, ’he replied that he was the master and would do as he liked. He refused lib signal ber. Had the vessel's direction 'not beeq shifted she

would have met the steamer. —By Mr Stout s The captain was quite atupified, proof oFs which was his refusing to do anything. Witness believed this Also from his refusing to adopt his (witness’s) advice. Another proof his drunkenness .was given by bis pushing witness away when he hadja child in his arms. with Mr Booth at thR/ptlier.Court, but ? he could “ insure you ’’ hb 'tad ttine witjioiim since the present action began.;- : .An adjournment rtas. thea v made, resuming, the first witness called was ‘ Dr John Thomas Tighe, who stated that he saw the flag hoisted, taken down, and rehoisted. A con versation took place as to the s gualling of the steamer, which the captain must have heard.

Mr Haggitt put a question as to the state of the captain at the time the steamer was abreast ot the vessel, to which Mr Stout objected, as he was only charged under a summary conviction case ; at least so it was understood, biit if such was hot the case, and he wlis to be chargeiV-before a jury with drunkenness, he, (Mr Stout) would not object. , Mr Haggitt said it*was only a suminaty conviction, 'hut he wished to' point out tHab the neglect in fiignalling .the steamfer was cauae<i fay the captain’a'incapahilitv. ; ‘ The question was allowted.' ' . ’ ’ *• > ~, .. iLe{b.,sifcting