RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3455, 19 March 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Thursday, March 19. (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.) Drunkenness. —John Carlyne was fined I.os or 4S hours’; John Gillieson and William Carroll 6s, or 24 hours’ each ; Christian Thompson 10s, or 3 days’ imprisonment. Habitual Drunkenness —Jane McDonald was charged with this offence.—Pri. soner said that she Lad been working with Irish people, and Tuesday being st. Patrick’s Day they had some drink, and she had a glass with them. She wished Sfc. Patrick’s Day had never come, for it was evidently going to he an ill day for her.—His Worship said that if it had been her first offence, he would have taken Sfc. Patrick into account (laughter), but with six previous convictions slaring him in the face, he could not do so. Prisoner would be sentenced to three months’ imprisonment. Abusive Language.— Johanna M‘Gowan was charged, on the information of George Watkins, with making use of indecent language in Hanover street on the 16th insfc. James MGowan said that ever since he had forbidden Mrs Watkins his house, the women had been at “loggerheads.” On the night in question the language used was equally bad on both sides—one trying to cap the other’s phrase by adding such words as “ confounded” to the former one.— His Worship hail but little doubt that defendant had used very bad language; but as the parties were apparently respectable people, a mitigated penalty of 5s and costs, or twenty four hours' imprisonment, would be imposed

Pawnbroker’s T icensk.— The application by Lewis Lyons for renewal of a pawnbroker’s license was granted. Assault. —Jas M‘Bryde was charged with assaulting Michael O’ Hair at Green Island on the 10th inst. Mr Harris appeared for complainant ; Mr M‘Keay for defendant. The first witness called was Edward Hulme, M.D , who stated that complainant called on him for advice a few days ago. He was suffering from a swelling in the neck—inflammation and effusion—and said that he had a great difficulty in swallowing in consequence. Witness did not consi ier the injuries of a dangerous character. He prescribed poulticing and bathing. He did not consid-r them of a revere nature. The case

- was then a-ljourned till Tuesday next. As there were three indictable offences to J be heard, the remaining civil eases were also t adjourned till Tuesday, j Perjury. Henry Edwaid Augustus Campbell, a man of color, was charged with j having wilfully committed perjury while f giving evidence in the case of Grant and i another y. Campbell, in which he was dej fendant; at West Taieri, on February 23 e Prisoner was not defended. The following • evidence Was given :-James Fulton, RM.: y T was chairman of the Bench of MagisJ trrtes at Outram, West Taieri, on February 23 There, was .a case set down for hearing ' on that day. Grant y. Campbell, The suit 3 was on a dishonored promissory note. The e prisoner was defendant, and was duly sworn by me. I produce the summons, plaint i note, and the dishonored bill. When askqd f at first whether be had given the promissory \ note, and whether the signature at the

f bottom of it was his, he gave an un- ‘ decided answer, but subsequently swore positively that the signature was not his. ' Ith n asked him to write his name on a 1 blank piece of. poper. . He did so on the fc slip of paper which I now produce. Haying been shown a letter, I again asked him to i sign his name again. He then refused to do so. The letter now produced is the one that r 'vas shown to mo. I adjourned the case till , the 9th March (the next Court' day) and t then gave judgment for the amount claimed, ; Prisoner did not attend on that day.—By 3 Prisoner : You said you would agree to pay r any amount due by you to Mr Grant. You said the signature was not in your handr writing, but it was your name.—Prisoner : t And I say so still,—Peter Melville Grant . storekeeper, residing at West Taieri; I know 1 the accus d. 'J be promissory note produced 5 was given to me, by him on December Jsib, f 1873, and was due on the 18th January fol--3 lowing. I saw him attach his name to that note, After the proaijssory note was due, 1 | held a conversation witfaaccusc’d, I met him \ casually in the street and asked him why be had : not meet bis acceptance. He said he was sorry . for having dishonored it, that ho was going- , to get some money and he would pay it that . afternoon. He did not call, but a few days '. afterwards I received the letter produced. It ‘ is signed “Henry E. C. A. Campbell.” I ' further produce the receipt from accused • signed in the same manner. X was present J in Cpurt wlien |ie gave evidence. The promissory note was never mot. I sped fpr tlje . amount and obtained judgment Accused defended the action, and when in court . swore most positively that the signature was ; °ot bis, I saw the oath administered to i him by Mr Fulton.—Henry Ambridge, clerk ; to the trustees of P. M. Grant, knew the > promissory note referred to. Had seen it before. On the 15th December saw the Prisoner at the bar sign it. Was present m the fyM- Cpujrb, West Taieri, on the 23rd February, when the firm of P, M„ Grant sued .for the amount of the dis-* honored accepted, " Prisoner was present and _ defended the action. Saw Mr Fulton administer the oath. After some quibbling prisoner swore that he never signed the acceptance, and that he bad. never seen it, By prisoner ; Did not you swear before Mr Fulton that yrn saw a man sign the bill?—I swear now ihkfr I saw you sign It.—But did not you then -swear that it was a dark man?—X did.—When'the question was put a second time as to my identity, did not you swear that you could not recognise me as the man who signed the bill.—l told Mr Fulton that I could not swear positively that you were the man. I was not thoroughly acquainted with your features then, but I am n6iv.—Wifcpegg then explained that Grant and) Cp. had had transaetiqns with another colored man, and did not know till the ptorn-

ing that the case was heard at Outran*,' Who Campbell wag. He new swore that accused was the man who signed the note.—Thomas Kerr, manager of the National Bank at OiUram, was examined as an expert. He was pf /Jpinioij that the signature to the pronjissory note ajid the letter were in the same handwriting, There was a similarity in the signature of the others, but he could not swear to them,—Accused was then committed for trial. Assault and Robbery.— StephenToomey on remand, was charged with violently assaulting and beating one William Schmidt on , his pptsun a pocket-book containing thee one- i pound notes and* two pence. , 1 his case had not concluded when we went to press, being adjourned till after the civil , cases. .* ’ civil cases. { Mary Theresa Ryan v. Hugh M‘Millan. i r, . or of agreement s and L 7 Is for wages due.-Mr A. Bathgate who appeared for plaintiff, asked to abandon 1 the Lip plann.—Mr Harris, for defendant, t w^l ,f to the abandonment, re : 1 marked that the insertion of 1 that claim on •' the summons necessitated his client coming v from Tapanni- 150 miles.— Evidence having v been given by plaintiff', Mr Ham? proposed s to pay the amount claimed, less L2, as por- v , ? ?T^ x P e “? e8 P by defendant in taking plaintiff to Tapanui. If this proposal was f not agreed to «n adjournment would have to hj be made so that defendant’s wife’s evidenced hj Wgbt be tftken at Tapanui • and fjiuntif' i\

be-'iQqoxiveQienced. Alr thrown out'-by Hr Harriet the case was adjourned days.'