RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT PORT CHALMERS.

Evening Star, Issue 3438, 27 February 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT PORT CHALMERS.

(Before Drs. Drysdale and O’Donoghue, J.P.’s) Friday, February 27. Assault.— James M'Parlane, chief officer of the ship Warwick, was charged by John Nickolls with assaulting him by knocking him down, on or about the 2lst December.— Defendant pleaded not guilty.—John Mckolls was on the look-out or the forecastle between twelve and two, when the accused came there with a bucket of water and threw it at him. By stepping aside, it missed him. The accused stated he was asleep, and knocked him down, which he (complainant) denied, having sfrupk the hell each half-hour. Next day, while at the wheel, heard the accused tell the captain about him being asleep on the look-opt. The accused then cams and again struck him. Some of the passengers saw him do so! Accused told witness he would give him the second dose when he left the wheel. Shortly afterwards, he looked into the defendant’s cabin with a belaying-pin in his hand, when defendant attempted to strike him. He then threw the pin at the mate, who' picked it up and struck him with his fiats.—By accused: Was not asleep, and struck the bell Did throw the pin ; he had it for the pur’, pose of breaking some bread. —By the Bench ; The reason he did not bring the charge before was that ho did not intend doing so until the other day, when he and the accused had another row.—Charles Harris and Charles Napier deposed to seeing the chief officer strike the complainant.— Capt. skinner said that on the lSch December the chief officer complained to him that the complainant was continually asleep on the loofc-oijt. The next day be spoke to com-

plainant, and cautioned him. After being in the cabin about half-an-hour, witness came on deck again, and saw Nickolla in the act of throwing a belaying pin at the head of the chitf officer, who then rushed out of his cabin and struck Nickolls several times. Witness then went between them, and sent the man forward.—The Bench dismissed the case, on account of the length of “ tijke since the vessel’s arrival, and complainant’s own statement that the charge was only brought on account of some grievance since*, ,■