RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3659, 13 November 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Thursday, November 12. {Before J. Bathgate, Esq., E,M.) Slv Grog Seldisg.—J.,lm Mitchell, proprietor of what was formerly known as the Bay View Hotel, but which is now uulicens -d, was charged with selling beer. Mr i i arris defended.— Ritchie, the informant, deposed to purchasing a bottle of beer from defendant; but neither he nor Dsvliu was able to identify the hot le produc d as the one they bought. At the suggestion of the Bench the charge w;s with dawn, and defendant proceeded agaiust for selling a bottle of porter. His Worship considered the charge proved, and fined defendant L2O John M'Cluskey vyas also charged with selling liquor at Gr en Island without a license. Mr Harris appeared for defendant, who admitted selling the liquor, but stated his ignorance of the law. A fine of L2O was inflicted, and, in delivering judgment, bis Worship said he looked upon tln-sc proceedings as essentially necessary fur the protection of the failtrader. A passage of Arms.— During the hearing of the ch rga against Mitchell, Mr Har.i*° who defended him, observed that the witnesses for the pro-ceutiou were tutored by the police, whereupon the following triangular duel took place Sub-inspector Mallard : If that observation is meant fur me, or for the police, it is scandalous His Vv o ship .- I don’t call it dirty wor^c. — Mr Harris : I do.—His Worship : I don’t think so.—Mr Hams; Other Magistrates have condemned such evidence, and have held that those informers who incite persons to commit such crimes are as bad as those who do them.—His Worship : For tho sake of good government, the police must employ such detectives. I hope you were not serious iu your iuueudo that the police suborn or tutor witnesses what to say. Mr Harris : [ did uot say so.—His Worship : But you inferred as much, Mr Harris : Your Worship may know the English language better than 1 d>, but I doubt it.— Hia Worship : And allow me to say that such expro sous of opinion, unless proved, should not be mad.—Air Harris : I am not- in the witness box.—Sub-Inspector Mallard : Then you have no right to make such remarks.— Mr Harris: I don’t bc-lievo the public will for a mom ut support the action of the police in this matter.—Hia Worship : I have to request that no further remarks bo made by counsel unless they are lo bo proved by evidence.—Mr Harris : I will prove my remarks, and I again repeat what I said about the polico and the conduct of these cases.— Sub-Inspector Mallard : And I deny it, and state that I have done nothing unbecoming au officer and a gentleman, or derogatory to the position I hold ; and the remarks of Mr Harris I look upon as most un,gentlemanly. —Mr Harris: f jou say t; at outside the Court I will make you ivp nt it. —His Worship : Although Mr Mallard way know what

h;s witnesses are going to say, I s.e nothing | wrong in that, and there is no ground for { your accusation.—The evidence was then proceeded with. Friday, November 13. (Before J. Balhg.Vc, hs ;i ., U.M.) Civil, CASES Davidson v. r-.i eter. —Claim LlO, for damage caused by the trespas« fdi f mdant s ea'tle. Mr -r-auden appeared f.<r plain*ift ; Mr Mou-at for defendant. —l‘!aintilT. a s ;t----fcitr residing near Blues kin, nai l eight head ”f defendant’s cab:l; had broken in to his property, doing 'damage to bin fruit trees to the. amount claimed. The garden was fenced all round, but some bush laud at the back was opr-u—fn cross-examination plaintiff admi tel ibat part of the garden fence was <b>wn at the time of the tres;ats. Defendant disputed the amount of the loss sustained b, plaintiff, an I iai i lie had offered io pay him for ilie re d loss .T.iintiS's own cow md trespassed on wen ss’.- garden, and done dam,v o v.h re. bn..h •Im i so er ciaimed any: hing from the pUisr.ff far it. Peter vi '(ire .or. a neighbor, \vh > went over plaintiff's gaiden after t.hc trespass, had made an estimate of the damage caused to the f uit tr. Ec and plants, which he considered 10s 6d would cover—Ll wou d be ample ; and, for himself, lie would be “ glad for coos to damage his garden in the same way every day. if begot LI each time.” -Mis Worship said this cl .ss of case should never come to Court, but should rattier be settled at the time of trespass by neighbors, who could assets Me damage. Defendant Lad done wrong in not get iug the ease settled m that way, thereby forcing tbs plaintiff to bring rbo a tiou Judgment would be given for plaintiff for L 3, with costs.