Feilding R.M- Court

Feilding Star, Volume VI, Issue 78, 11 December 1884, Page 2

Feilding R.M- Court

Wednesday, December 10th, 1884. (Before R. Waifl, Esq., R.M.) THREATENING LANOTTAGB. James Ewing was charged on the information of Maurice K. Samuel with, using threatening language towards the latter on the 6th inst. whereby complainant sought to haTe defendant bound over to keep the peace towards him. Mr Esam appeared for complainant and Mr Staite for defendant. Mr Staite applied for an anjournment, as he was not prepared to go on with the defence. Mr Esam asked for the evidence for the complainant to be heard, to which Mr Staite offered no objection. Walter Jenkins, painter of Awahuri, deposed to being outside the Endymioao Hotel on Saturday evening ; saw Ewing who was half seas over, and was cursing and swearing about Samuel to witness and others , said Samuel was an infernal rascal, and he would give anybody £15 to kill him, and would like to boil him down for his fat, and put his head into a box ; on another occasion defendant said if he got Samuel into the bush he would not come out alire; he was perfectly sober then. Cross-examined : Had known Ewing a month, and hadn't been on friendly or unfriendly terms with him ; defendant said what he did of Samuel as if he meant it; had heard no one else threaten Samuel though he would not like to be in his place, and if he were he would arm himselt with a couple of revolvers and bowie kniyes. Kichard Reeves stableman, at the hotel, deposed to hearing Ewing say he would knock Samuel's head into a mummy and boil him down for fat. Cross-examined : Knew nothing of the various disputes between the parties, as he had only been there a week or two ; defendant appeared to seriously mean what he said, and did not think he was merely " gassing." Maurice K. Samuel, the complainant, deposed to Ewing coming to lodge at his house and leaving in October last ; had cause to fear bodily harm at his hand* ; he had threatened to knock him on the head, blow him up dy uamite, Doison him —all sorts of things ; had asked several persons to put a stop to guard him, and would swear he was in bodily dangerCross examined : Had not robbed defendant of two or three hundred pounds ; had received certain moneys (named) from him or by his order in payment of certa : n claims (named). Mr Staite was proceeding to examine complainant on the cashing of various cheques for defendant, whereupon His W rship said he failed to see what this had to do with the case. Cross-examination continued : Laid the information from fear and by persuasion of several persons, who said if anything happened to him it would be his own fault; defendant had struck him in the face, and bailed him up several times, threateningly demanding to be served with drink. Mr Staite asked witness several questions relating to certain charges made in court against him, and Mr Esam produced a certificate of .dismissal of one of thecharges in particular, which was read out by the Clerk of the Court. Wilfred Jackson, clerk to Messrs Halcombe and Sherwill, Feilding, deposed to having heard defendant use abusiveand threatening language about Samuel ; had heard him say he would give any* body £100 to set Samuel into Wanganui and that he would like to kill him. Witness was not cross-examined. Mr Staite asked for an adjournment* as he had had neither sufficient time nor instructions to prepare his defence. Mr Esam thought there was sufßcie nt evidence to warrant the defendant being bound over. His Worship thought an adjournment was due to the defendant, and accordingly the case was adjourned till the 24th inst. Ewing v Samuel.— Claim £100. Mr Staite and Mr Hawkins for plaintiff, and Mr Esam for defendant. Mr Staite addressed the court, and produced a roll of amended particulars, which he read, showing that the plaintiff had p<iid certain snms of money to defendant, when the plaintiff was under theinfluence of drink, during the months of September and October, in which period between £200 an! £300 was obtained from plaintiff. James Ewing deposed he was a bushman, residing at Awahuri; bad been boarding at Samuel's hotel in September and October. [Bank book produced to show amount spent at Samuel's during that time— close on £200.] Had been staying there 12 months ago; on September Ist £32 was paid to defendant ; on same day £1 ; on the 6th £3 ; on the 10th cash £3 ; September 16th check £7; September 24th £10 ; October Ist, £5 j 4th £2 ; 13th £1 ; 13th £1 ; 22nd £7 ; 25th £1 and £3; 29th £24; defendant had nothing to do with last amount; out of this £100 defendant had had abomfe £90; spent over £200 in the months "of September and October ; in August paid about £600 or £800 in to his bank account; was drunk when he signed th« cheques and orders ; defendant supplied him with money for gambling. [Orders produced, some of which had "drunken signatures." Council for the defence objected to these orders, except one, as they were anterior to the dates mentioned. Alter some discussion they were allowed to be put in.] Did not know what he was doing when he gave defendant the order ; was riot able to get any account from Samuel, who said he left hi« books in plaintiff's rooms and never saw tbem again ; only got one account, which wa» for £33 ; would not say that Samuel encouraged him to drink ; he lent witness-

money to shout with ; defendant had had tbe biggest share of £300; defendant charged £2 per week tor board 5 used to borrow small sums from defendant, from 6s to £5 ; thr latter witness lent to someone—six or seven pounds in all ; most of tbe money went in drinking and gambling; defendant gambled with him daily almost; sold him a bottle of grog which even Mr Staite, as a good drinking man, couldn't drink ; it put the fire out (laughter) ; he had several kinds of liquor— some very bad ; he gives the swells goad liquor; in October or November Constable Gillespie was brought to his bedroom ; he was sick from the effects of his poison ; had a row the night before about the account of £33 ; defendant had insulted ■witness, who was drunk; Gillespie refused to take him in charge ; had drmks in the " bar with defendant immediately afterwards ; left the hotel that evening, taking a bottle of whiskey ; he called witness a loafer; had heard him call respectable men loafers. The whole of the cheques drawn on plaintiff's banker were here produced ; witness said they all bore his signature. R. Fitzberbert deposed : Was manager of the Bank of New Zealand, Feilding ; know the plaintiff, who kept an account ; tbe cheque of £32 was in. favor of Prior ; could produce ike cheque and show to whftse credit it went to. The plaintiff, Ewin?, was now crossexamined by Mr Esam : Was sober when he signed (order produced) for a second time ; was sober when he signed cheque for £3 [the general evidence of witness was to the effect that he was not particularly drunk when he signed them] ; one cheque for £7 was drawn by witness at the bnnk ; the £32 was in part payment for board and three parts for whiskey ; defendant had asked him to gamble; had done so for more than la— up as far as 5s —and had seen him gamble up to £5 with Harry Hughes ; did not remember who was present ; went back to the hotel because it suited him ; Prior and Sandi« lands were his solicitors ; they would not do business with him when he was drunk; he got tired of the Israelite, and he trarelled; went back to him of his own free will. A letter was here read from plaintiff's solicitor to defendant. Re-examined by Mr Staite: Might have owed £20 for board out of the sum of £84. M. K. Samuel, the defendant, deposed : He knew plaintifl ; had offered a smal] sum of money to plaintiff to settle the case : plaintiff had not spent a large sum of money in the house ; had cashed some of the cheques mentioned in the summons, the three last, for £3, £1, and £1 ; did not gamble with Ewing; had "shook" with him for drinks ; did not get a cheque from Prior and Sandilands about the last day of August ; remembered tailing Gillespio up to his room to have him turned away from the home ; had no dispute about the account ; he had been drinking the previous evening and ho gave him a glass of beer to go away ; did not recollect Gillespie saying Ewmg had the horrors, and he was not to be supplied with drink ; there had been disputes about accounts, but they were settled [Ewing's account for September and October was shown in m memorandum bookj ; never sold bad grog to plaintiff; he was pretty sober when the cheques were cashed ; had not given him money for the special purpose of shouting. Mr Sandilands garo evidence as to the several orders (5) received from Mr Samuel. Mr Esam said that ho did not think he had a case to answer. Mr Staite replied. The case will be concluded on Monday at Mar ton. CIVIL CASES. Lowers t O'Toole.— Claim L 4 8s 9d. Case struck out. Gichard v Feoron.— Claim Ll3 8s sd. Defendant was ordered to pay 10s per month or in default 13 days imprisonment in Wanganui goal.