RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3475, 13 April 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Saturday, April 11. {Before J. Bathgate, Esq., E.M.) In the case of Hutchison v. Goodison, heard on the above date, the following evidence was given:— Sarah Mitchell, wife of J. Mitchell, residing at the Bay Yiew Hotel, near the Anderson’s Bay road, said she knew the accused and also the complainant. Saw both of them on Thursday, the 2nd, at five o’clock p.m., or a little later. She was in the bar of the hotel. Hutchison and Goodison were also in the bar, having come in together. The former had some blood on his face. She thought it came from his nose. ’ She also saw his hat, which Was in a battered condition. His coat was all over dust, as if he bad been lying on the gronnd. Hutchison' fainted on the sofa. Mr Hocken was sent for, and came at complainant’s request. The latter remained in a fainting condition for a quarter-of-an-hour. A large quantity of blood came from him—she thought from his nose. Accused was her son-in-law. She had some conversation with him on the previous day at her house. He did not ask her about the evidence she w&s going to give Fhomas M. Hocken recollected Thursday , , attended complainant at about eight o clock that evening at the Bay View Hotel, there was a large bruise extending upwards from the eye and backwards through the ~* ir » and another behind that farther on to the head. There was also a slight abrasion on the nose, and a third bruise behind the head, he thought. When witness saw him blood was coming from his nose. The wounds described were evidently severe blows, but not dangerous, and would product discoloration. Supposing Hutchison had had a bat on, the wounds must have been given with consider-1

able force.—By the Bench; The wound* were evidently inflicted shortly before witness examined them. He should say with Ibe small end of a whip.—Charles Burgess, bricklayer, remembered Thursday, the 2nd April perfectly well. On that day saw complainant on horseback, about eighty yards from. Mitchell’s hotel. Also saw Goodison on horseback. He saw some striking going on, and the horses rearing up. He oould not say who was doing the striking, as he was 120 yarilh off. Afterwards saw complainant in the hotel, and observed that he had some cuts on his face. He fainted, and witness was requested by him to go for a doctor.— By Mr Stout; He heard Hutchison says “ That he (Goodison) must be a bad man to strike him across the head with a whipstock.”—Stephen Stamp Hutchison: I recollect Thursday, the 2nd day of April. I was riding along the Anderson’s Bay Road from Dunedin towards home at about 6 p.m.

on that day. I saw the accused in tbe Bay Horse Hotel, and seeing cattle, called him out, and asked him how he had got my calves with hia cows. He said he could not get the cows away from them, and they weuld have died if left behind. I had sold the cows to one of my female servants named May, but had not sold the calves. Previously, on the same day, I saw accused in Dunedin, and knowing that he was going out to see the cows, told him that I would not sell the calves on any account. I alio told him who the cows belonged to. He then said that he would go and look at them. When I met him on the Anderson’s Bay road in the evening, 1 told him that if he did not take the calves to where he got them, I would give him in charge for cattle-stealing, I turned my horse’s head towards Dunedin, with the intention of carrying out my threat. He caller) mo, and I returned. ‘When I came back I went to head the cattle, which were going down the St. Kilda road, and asked a _ man, not known to jrje, who was passing, to identify the calves, three in number, as they were not branded, and I also said I would not allow auy one to thieve my cattle. Goodison, who was about fifty yards off, said ‘‘Did you call me a b thief.” I replied, “No ; but if you take those cattle you won’t be much better.”

Wfth that he rode at me with a band gallop. 1 had no whip with me, and was perfectly defenceless. After the first Wow he dire* his horse’s head ronnd, and repeated it three times till I got hold of his whip. I held on to it till I felt the saddle going from under me, when I had to J.eave go. He then aimed another blow at me with the butt-end of the whip, but missed, striking the horse’s head, and producing an abrasion across the left eye, which was swollen, inconsequence, fq# two or three -days. My horse feared and swang round, and I took hold of the main by the right hand, loosing the reins with the left so as to prevent the horse throwing me. Accused then jumped off his horse and again struck me with the butt end of the wLip, knocking my hat oyer and hitting me on the shoulder. He struck me several tidies after-wards—-twice or three times on the head. The whip had an animal’s head of metal qh it. At this moment a man named Peter M‘Kenzie came up and said, “That’s not fair play to strike another whep ho*s got nothing to defend himself with,” thereupon, accused offered me his whip, saying, “ Takq the whip; defend yourself with it." I was too exhausted— too far gone, to do so then. When M'Kenzie came up he desisted; I believe if he had not come up I should have been brained—(laughter) —as I was then almost stupid. I was bleeding profusely at thf time, and went tq thq Say View Hotel, —Mr Harris ? Now, during the whole of tfio time this affray waß going on, did you strikq or aim a blow at accused f —No, I never did. Accused went into the hotel immediately after me. I pointed to my forehead, saying to nun, ‘You are a cowardly vagabond to stake me with the butt-end of your whip when .1 was thoroughly defenceless.” I asked that Mr Hocken should be sent for, and do not recollect what occurred from that time till he

came, I wanted to go home that night, but could not rige. A{y eye completely closed during the following day (Good Friday), and I was confined tp my bed dupl ing the whole of that and the greater part •f the following day.—By Mr Stout• After accused called me I swear he did not say that I had better see Mias May before giving him in charge for cattle-stealing. I have since been informed that Miss May sold the calves on representations made by the accused. There is not a finer riding horse than mine. It never struck me to ride away. lam not a coward.—By Mr Stout: Did you authorize Miss May to go down to apologize to Goodison for the words you had used?— Witness (stamping his feet): No, bah, never, ridiculous. If I had done wrong, I would have apologised as

a gentleman.—Peter M'Kenzie said he was a contractor, and resided on the Anderson’s Bay Road. On Thursday, April 2, between o and 6 o. clock, saw both complainant and accused. Heard part of a conversation betareen them about’ somd calvefc.‘ * High'Wprda took place. Hutchison “called Goodiedfi I b thief” three times. Two other persons were present. Some one sang out that Goodisou was horse-whipping Hutchison. He saw some blows struck by Goodison, and went up to them saying ho wanted to see mr play. Both were on horseback, and Hutchison had no whip. • Goodison offered the whip, as Hutchison accused him of being a coward in striking him when he had no whip. Goodison then said, “Now you can

give me as much as I have given you if you S,re able.” Huchison was cut and bleeding —My Harris ftsked tp bp allowed to put the question whether the Witnbss was drunk py sober on the night in question.—Mr ’Stout objected.—His Worship said he could ask the question.—Mr Stout still objected.—His Worship remarked that he was always willing to have questions put for the elimination of the truth, and allowed Mr Harris’s question —Witness then stated that he was not drunk.—This was the case for the proseoution,—Mr Stout said he had five witnesses to call, but submitted that there was no case to answer. Accused was not charged with assault, but with asssulj: with'intent l to do grievous bodily harm.’ No priha fitcie fcasfi ot tfeat nature had been proved, iu fact, it , . “ een disproved by accused offering complainant the whip to defend himself, and by his conduct throughout. This charge should be dismissed, and any other complainant wished might be laid. Accused might have a good action for slander against complainant for openly charging him with the theft of the calves, when in truth he had bought thei#.—Ufa Worship was of opinion that there was’ sufficient evidence 04 which to send accused to trial.—Mr j Thefi I’ll not call evidence.—Bail was allowed, aocused himself in L2OO and two sureties of LIOO each.

Monday, April 13. (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.) DjUTKiENNKSS-Mary M'Lauchlan was fined five, shillings, with the option of Sil‘ °n hours lm P™onment • Matthew English, LI or seven days ; Benjamin Earra. L2 or fourteen days ; John Jones, five shillings or forty-eight hours*. John Brown, w T a? . Vr ama ? 0n bo * rdt he Maori,which had sailed for Lyttelton on the previous 2!£»*? »PP e »r in «* Worship ordered• l? e lssued for M 8 apprehension, after |it Vagrancy. —Fred. Harris was brought Up, ’vi U r emaud i »nd charged with having no visible lawful means of support. The Bench

Considered the case proved, and sentenced him .to three months’ imprisonment with hard labor. CIVIL OASFS. Married Women’s Protection Order, —Jane Carter, wife of John Carter,-applied to have an order made for the protection of her earnings, on the ground of her husband being an habitual drunkard ; and further, to have him made to contribute tow.irds the maintenance of her family.—His Worship granted both applications, defendant to contribute twelve shillings per week. Leary v. Hunt.—Claim L2 9s, for ale id and delivered, Mr A. Bathgate for plaintiff, and Mr Stout for defendant.— Thomas Goodsir, a member of the firm of Goodsir, Pell, and Co., got an order fora cask of ale to be sent for defendant to a Mr Calcutt’s house. Plaintiff sued as assignee in the estate of Goodsir, Pell, and Co.—The defence was that the ale was ordered by defendant for a Mr Calcutt at defendant’s request. Nothing was said about the matter for sixteen months, which was after plaintiff had been made assignee, when defendant received a letter threatening to take him to law if he did not pay the amount.—ln answer to the Bench he said he could not produce a receipt as he never got the ale His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff.—Mr Stout; Then whenever an agent orders goods for a principal the agent becomes liable?— His Worship : They were marked down against the defendant at the time. Judgment for plaintiff. Jeremiah Collins v. Charles Belmont.— Claim of LI. Mr Stout defended, not on account of the paltry amount, but as it involved a serious charge against defendant.— Plaintiff, a grey-headed old man, who stated that he dealt in cabbages, turnips, *c., said that defendant’s wife on a Saturday night recently went to his shop and purchased lux penny’s worth of cabbages, She gave him what appeared to be a sovereign, and as he not change he went anfl changed pound note, giving her I9s 6d back. He afterwards found the sovereign (the one produced) to be q bad one —His Worship (after looking at it): If you had looked upon one side of it you would have seen a picture and an inscription “Keep your temper (Laughter)-Wit-ness : It was dark and I put it in my pocket.

Slie gave it to me. I swear jt is as true as t fIW a man. No pne was present expept Belmont.—Anno Belmont swore most diqtinctty that she had never seen th# «oin produced before. She gave defendant a note on the night in question. —Plaintiff: I positively swear in the presence of my God and man. that she gave me that sovereign. It 'being oath against path the case was dismissed. Belcherv. Glass.—ClaimL7s.—Mr Stewart for plaintiff.—His Worship; What have you to say in answer to the claim ’—Defendant; Not guilty.—His Worship ; You are not being tried criminally. Are you indebted or not ?-Defendant ; I don’t understand Scotch lavjrs.—His Worship ; Do you jidmit the claim 2 Are you owing the money 2 j pu are now called upon as a witness for the plaintiff and are only ashed to swear to the truth. I know as little for what purpose you are here as you do.—Defendant > I don’t take the oath till X know tnorQ about it.—His Worship : We will make short work of that.—Defendant (to Mr Stewart) : You are a lawyer, and you ought to know what I am summoned io r - —Mr Stewart; To give evidence about the L7s.—Defendant; You had better ask the prosecutor j t he knows more about it than + do.—His Worship » Underptapd, you can’t pe punished for it now.—Witness ; I’ll take good care of that. *J never saw a woman gskpd by. English law to give evidence against herself. t-r*His Worship then explained that if she did not take the oath she was liable to a penalty of LlO, or in default could be sent to gaol.—Defendant said she could not understand the Scotch law.—His Worship : That is English law.—Defendant: I will answer any question your Worship puts ; I will not answer these lawyers. I will be gwpfh to tgll the trvjth. -bhe then took the path, and said phe was at the Albipn Hotel about a fortnight or three weeks ago. Not haying taken stock pf the day of the week, she could not state when it was. She changed the note produced (L2O) in Port Chalmers. A man gave her that and another L2O note. He gave her money to buy clothes. She was •togo to Timaru and cook for him and six others, his mates. She did not know the man—took him for what he was worth. It was not her business who he was. Mr Stewart was a lawyer, and she had put herself under his Worship’s protec-

tion. She waa not going to answer hia questions, as she was summoned by the Crown to appear next day. She had no female acquaintances here. Never gave any money to a stout woman to keep for her. She was never in Belcher’s company, and never took any money from him. She had been drinking heavily on the strength of her acquittal.— Plaintiff said that defendant took the L 75 fronj his right hand trousers pocket.—Defendant;! am net particular where J'get the money, as long as I&6 get it.—His Worship considered that defendant had failed to account satisfactorily for the money, and gave judgment for plaintiff.