Feilding R.M. Court

Feilding Star, Volume VII, Issue 104, 11 February 1886, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court

Wednesday, February 27, 1886. Before E. Ward, Esq., E.M. Mr Sandilands made application for a warrant to arrest Edward Dorreen for wife desertion. His Worship said that if reasonable efforts were made, to serve a summons and they failed, he would grant the warrant ..- Police v George Adams, for breach of Borough By-law No 1 1 1 , by driving v . a vehicle not having proper lights. Constable James Meehan said he was on duty in Manchester street at about 9 o'clock on the Sunday night in question, and saw the offence committed. - Fined 5s and costs 15s. J. Turner v B. Belfit, for assault ; also for using obscene language. The two charges were heard together Mr Sandilands for plaintiff and Mr - > -Staite for defendant. The information re obscene language was amended. Mr Sandilands opened the casei r Mrs T. W. Foster deposed that she remembered the night of the 4th mat.; attended the lecture at the Forester** Hall; saw E. Belfit knock a man down, who fell right &t her feat ; saw blood oozing from his face; Belfit made use of bad language; hismother and father tried to stop him, but he said—*' I'll good thrashing." Gross-examined : Was quite positive Turner -was knocked down; did not hear any other language; knew nothing about the dog-fight. Re-examined: There were plenty of women and children about. John Turner, plaintiff, deposed that he was at the lecture ; before he came out of the Hall saw dogs fighting ; one was his dog ; tried to stop the fight but Belfit stopped him; Charlie Wick- - ham chucked out the dogs from the yard; defendant wanted to have a smack at plaintiffs son, and then he said he'd have a smack at witness ; after a few words defendant knocked witness down; struck him several times ; witness' son caught defendant round the waist, saying— " Don't hit my father any more." (The bad language quoted was, of course, unfit for publication). Cross-examined: The dog is not a quarrelsome dog; he has fought sometimes, the same as any other. dog; gave him no signal to fight; defend*.: antruahed for witness' son to strike him; witness did not put his hand on Belfit ; . used neither threats nor bad language to defendant; really fell when struck. Geo. Foster deposed : Remembered the lecture at the hall ; saw the dogfight ; Turner was standing inside the gate ; saw defendant rush through the^ crowd and strike plaintiff on the face; plaintiff was cut on the face and knocked down ; some one caught hold of defendant, who said — " I know I'll have to pay for it, so let me warm the b ;" saw him- strike plaintiff three times. Cross-examined: Plaintiff had a,■ whip in his hand but did nut threaten <4 with it ; heard defendant swear-; plaintiff did not swear; saw young 1 Turner push Wickliatn ; did not think .'. this started the row ; did not see Turner catch hold of defendant ; heard Belfit use the words "Let me go," when the other chaps were holding* him ; other people used bad language. Be - examined : Plaintiff neither caught hold of defendant nor struck , him. C. Staite gave evidence similar to •hat of previous witnesses. Peter Thomson, tinsmith, deposed : Was a member of the Foresters' Hall Committee ; was present at the lecture ; after the lecture, in coming out of the hall, sa w there was a fight ; defendant was in the position of fighting ; there*' was a man knocked down, and a lot of bad language used ; saw plaintiff with his left hand up, and the palm putwards, saying he did not want to fight ; there were a number of men hounding Belfit on ; saw young Turner holding; defendant, trying to prevent him strik- " ing his father ; there were a lot of women and children within hearing of the bad language. •._ . Cross-examined: Heard plaintiff saying he wanted to have nothing to do with defendant ; knew defendant to be a sober, hard working man ; knew, plaintiff to have done hard work in bush falling. J. Rowley gave evidence similar to that ofprevious witnesses. , W. Heald, builder, deposed : Was . at the Foresters 1 Hall on Thursday night ; when he came outside he saw a dog-fight; Charles Wickham was trying to separate them ; young Turner pushed him away; some one struck young Turner, and this started the . row ; saw defendant knock plaintiff down ; the latter asked to be left alone j saw plaintiff do nothing to provoke, defendant. John Turner, junr., son of plaintiff, deposed: Was at the hall Thursday night; as he came out his attention was drawn to his dog fighting $ went to separate them, but was prevented by W. Belfit; C. Wiokham went to stop them, but witness cautioned him to look out, as the dog would bite him. (Witness described the assault on his ;V father in same manner as previous witnesses). Heard defendants father encourage his son to thrash witness' father ; defendant followed witness and his father afterwards, making threats and asking them both to fight. Cross-examined: Supposed hewaa the cause of the disturbance by push- <--;,■ ing Wickham; was not aware of making use of bad language. GK Clark, blacksmith, gave evidence similar to that of previous witnesses, Mr Staite said that the defence would admit a blow waß struck. J. H. Blackmore, Lieut, of the Manchester Rifles, and formerly night watchman, was at the Hall on the night bef orementioned ;. saw' some dogs ; heard a peculiar whistle ; heard "* young Turner encouraging • the v dogs to fight; saw young Wicl^am r ' up one of the dogs ; saw young Turner push Wickham ; saw plaintiff hold his whip in a threatening manner, and'<j|bCtake hold of Belfit; plaintiff sai"d r tie": would smash Belfit's skull; at the

■^ th» time the two Turner's had hold of ~ Belfit; heard no bad language used by Belfit. Cross-examined : Could not say who whistled; Turner gave "Wickham a swing ; had off erred money to Wickham to lay au information ; don't speak to the Turners ; had not taken a list round to raise funds to prosecute Turner; heard Turner say he would smash Belfit's skull ; don't think Belfit used bad language; knew Rowley; had a conversation with him on. the drill ground ; told him he must tell the truth or he would be prosecuted for perjury; had given Wickham money to prosecute ; saw Belfit strike at Turner; saw both men fall; did not see Turner fail; Turner did not strike Belfit in witness's presence ; saw neither blood nor marks in Turner's face ; afterwards said that If he had been in Belfit's place he would have done the same. L. Ghirny deposed that he saw the affair at the Foresters' Hall ; young Turner caught hold of Wickham and threw him against the fence ; young Turner then caught hold of young Belfit ; Turner, senr., then interfered and used threats ; the two Turner's had hold of Belfit; heard no bad language; Bob Belfit came to the assistance of his brother ; saw Belfit strike Turner, who staggered back. The E.M. remarked here that there was wilful and corrupt perjury somewhere, and he was determined to get to the bottom of it. By the Court : Was asked by Belfit to appear, as a witness; did not hear any one swearing : there was a little disturbance ; did not know of any bad language. Michael Doherty described the dog fight and the surroundings. George Clark, senr., deposed that he was present at the lecture and described the dog fight; young Turner was ." seezhig on 'em on" ; did not see .Belfit strike Turner, nor use bad language ; young Turner commenced the row by sending Wickham sprawling. (His other evidence was unimportant.) Joseph Morgan, stone-engraver, was at the Foresters' Jwhen the dog fight took place ; saw Turner catch hold of Belfit by the collar, held a stockwhip over his head and threatened him ; Belfit called on him to let go ; did not hear him swear. Cross-examined: Did not see the disturbance from the beginning : saw Turner fall and pull Belfit on top of him ; did not hear any one call out to Belfit to warm the two Turners. By the Bench : Saw no striking. Mathew Belfit deposed that he was a brother of the defendant ; Wickham was the cause of the disturbance by trying to separate the dogs ; Bob told young Turner to leave him (witness's younger brother) alone ; the elder Turner caught hold of Bob and threatened to smash his head with the whip; did not know whether his brother struck Turner or not ; did not hear his brother use bad language. Cross-examined : Bill was walking tround the dogs to keep the people away to let the dogs fight which is the proper thing to do ; Turner came on the scene and said " If you don't leave my son alone I'll bash your b braius out " ; Turner was not knocked down ; couldn't see his brother Bob strike him. This was the case for the defence. George Foster, recalled, remembered speaking to Mr Blackuiore, who started kicking up a row about this case; Mr Blackniore called witness a b two-faced crawler; did not say that because B<?lfi f , had brought trouble in to his family he would swear against him. : . His Worship said m this case there was a great conflict of evidence. He would make allowances, for mistakes in memory, but some of the witnesses had wilfully hod. As to the charge of striking, he ■would di-smiss that as he believed ttio Turners were somewhat to blamo. But the language used, and the whole scene as described in the evidence, as well as in tho reports in. the newspapers, was a disgraco to the young men of Feilding. It was most discreditable that respectable people, with their wives and young children, could not walk in the streets without their ears bieng offended with disgus - mglanguage. As a lesson to young men not to disgrace the streets of Feilding he would sentence the prisoner to 7 days imprisonment with, hard labor in Wanganui gaoL He would make no order for costs. RAILWAY CASES. Police v Harry Dowclen, for breach of the Public Works Act, 1882, by driving a vehicle over a railway crossing when a train was approaching. Defendant pleaded guilty and was fined 10s and costs 7s. He police v George Ashworth. The defendant was charged with having on the 22nd of January, at the Halcombe station, got into a train when in motion, and pleaded guilty. He was further charged with having used abusive language to the railway guard. J. Hendley, guard, and C. Jacobs, who was a passenger in the train when the offence was committed, gave evidence and proved the case. For the first offence defendant was fined 10s and costs, and for the second 40s and costs 275. He was allowed .48 hours to find the money. DEBT CASES. E. Bowler v H. Hughes.— Claim £3 ss. Mr Sandilands appeared for the plaintiff. Defendant admitted the debt, which was ordered to be paid to plaintiff in 7 days. W. Whisker v Pethenck.— Claim £1 14s 6d. The defendant had paid 8s into court, which amount with a correction of Is 6d, left the sum at 255, value of a gate belonging to plaintiff. Defendant admitted that his horse, with, another belonging to Bellve, had broken the gate, but pleaded he had only agreed to pay half the cost. W. Whisker, a son of plaintiff, deposed: Had ridden up and heard a conversation ■with the plaintiff, defendant, and Bellve ; he heard an agreement made by Petherick to pay the whole cost of the broken gate. Petherick — on oath — deposed : Young Whisker was not present ; but was away somewhere shooting bullocks. The evidence of young Bellve was to the same effect. His Worship gave judgement for plaintiff for 20s and costs. The Court then adjourned.