MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2510, 24 April 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

OHRISTOHUROH. Monday, Afbil 24. [Before R. Boetham, 8.M.. T. W. Maude,

and J. W. Coward, J.P.'s.] Dbunkennbss George Craw, Thomas Ward, Mary Ann Duffua, t.od Thomas Gillon alias Dillon, &3., were fiued 10a each. Two boys aged about sixteen, were fined each ss. Andrew Jensen was fined ss. (For first offflnces, four men were each fined ss, all with the usual alternatives in default of payment of fines.

Fighting —William Bountree and Arthur Davis, boys aged about fourteen years, were charged with fighting in a publio thoroughfare. They pleaded guilty, were severely cautioned by the Bench, and discharged. Assaults. —Austin Lake, alias Israel Little, wua charged with grossly indecent behaviour to two young girls in High street at about eight o'clook the previous night. Prisoner denied the charges, but the girls themselves swore positively to his identity, and that they had contrived to keep him in sight from the time the offenoe was said to have been committed until they met a policeman, when they gave him in charge. Thore was no corroborative evidence offered of the assaults, but the Bench said that the young women were of rospectable character, and their story was vory clear, while the prisoner bad been previously oonvicted of various offences. They were satisfied he had been guilty on this occasion, and sentenced him to two months' imprisonment with hard labor. Selling Liquor afteb Boubs—Edward Hiorns, lioen-ee of the Central Hotel, Christchuroh, pleaded guilty to having sold liquor to three men at 1 a.m. on April 9th. Mr Holmes, for defendant, stated that the liquor had been served to tho men at their earnest solicitation, they being very fatigued after working at the Exhibition building. He was fined 20s, and the conviction was ordered to be endorsed on the license. Three witnesses who had been subpoenod by the police, but who were not oalled, were allowed expenses, 10s each. FBAY AT SUNNYSIDK. Owen Norton was charged that, being an attendant in the Sunnyside Lunatio Asylum, be, on April 18 u h, did unlawfully assault and strike a patient named George Berry. Mr Duncan appeared for the prosecution, Mr Joynt for the defence. Dr. Hscon, medical superintendent, stated that on the day named he saw defendant strike Berry in the face. Berry is a small man, about sft 2in high. Witness immediately discharged defendant. On examining Berry witness found that by the blow two teeth had been knocked out. When tho blow was struok Berry was struggling with defendant and another warder named Pngh. Berry had spongy gums, and many of bis remaining teeth were found to be loose. The blow left a small bruise on his lower jaw, but could not have been a very heavy one. Berry said tbat one of tho teeth was loose, and he had found the other on the floor. His evidence was not trustworthy. The fray took place in the refractory ward, of whioh defendant had charge since 1881. He had baen mi attendant at the Asylum since 1878. He was an excellent officer, and with the present exception witness never bad cause to complain of him.—Mr Joynt cross-examined Dr. Hacon, eliciting that it was probable that Berry had attacked the warders, ho was at times violent and treacherous; he was dangerous always. No warder, however, in the establishment was allowed to retaliate no matter what the provocation on the patients. Under the rules, there was xjo excuse for Norton's conduct,. The state of patients in the refractory ward had improved under his care. He had frequently been placed in dangerous positions and had come out of them without apparent fear and without injuring his patients. Tho*. Pugh, attendant at the Asylum, deposed that, b3ing on duty at about 2 p.m. on the day named, be heard a noise of a struggle in the refraotory ward. Witness ran in and caught hold of Berry, who w&s in the act of striking Norton. Norton then struck Berry in the mouth. Dr. Hacon came in and ordered Norton out. Berry ro tired up the ward, and returning, exhibited in his hand two teeth, saying to Dr, Hacon—" Am I a convict to be served like this." Cross-examined—Norton

struck Berry, his band did not accidentally oome into contact with Berry's face. Witness endeavored to ward off the blow, and some injnry ",o his fingers in doing so. He did not think, l.owever, that it was his hand which struok Berry's mouth, though it was quite possible that might have been the oas9. The struggle was violent, and Berry was a dangerous man to encountor. The fray arose as follows :—Dr. Hacon had been inspooting the ward, and while doing so, Berry had made use of most disgusting language to him. After the doctor had left, defendant remonstrated with Berry, who then appeared to defendant to prepare for an attack on him. Defendant seized him, and called for help, and a struggle ensued. The witness Pugh came up in a dilatory manner, and in further struggling, defendant believed his hand had struck or pushed the hand of Pugh against the mouth of Berry, Berry, though small in stature, was a powerful man. Defendant swore he had no intention whatever of striking Berry, and to the best of his belief did not do so. Dr. Coward stated that he knew defendant to be an excellent officer at Sunnyside, and to have been kind and gentle to the patients. Mr Joynt addressed the Bench, urging that whatever injur/ had been dono to Berry had been done accidentally. With the good character that defendant bore it was impossible to suppose othorwise. The Magistrate said that no doubt if a warder were proved to have deliberately ill-treated a lunatic he should be severely punished. In the face of the evidence given even by the prosecution as to the good character held for such a long time by defendant, it seemed improbable that ho should turn round and aot in a directly opposite manner. The question was whether an accidental or wilful blow had baen given in a struggle with a raging maniac. He was not prepared to say that, under certain circumstances, a warder would not be justified in stunning by a blow a patient otherwise ungovernable, perhaps those circumstances had not oocurred in this case, but its surroundings were so peculiar that he would not deliver judgment until the following morning. Judgment deferred accordingly. MISOBIiIiANBOTJS. —Edmund Robinson, for being in a railway carriage, travelling without a ticket, pleaded that he had lost his tioket. He was fined in the amount of the fare, 5i and costs. —G. W. Bryenton, for allowing a horse and oart to stand on a footpath, and Thomas Goodman, for a similar offence, were fined oaoh 6t.—Henry Piper, for riding on a footpath, was fined 5s. —Robert Henshaw, for furious riding, was fined 10s. James Magor, for allowing one horse and two oows to wander on the railway, was fined £1 ss. N. Russell, R. Honshaw, William Clark, William Ford, ar.d William Horner, for allowing horoeß and cattle to wander on the roads, were each fined ss.—Charles O'Mall y, for obstructing a thoroughfare by allowing a building on trucks to remain in Tuam street, w»B fined ss. -J. J. Dowey, in arrear with his contribution towards the support, of his two children at Burnham, was sent to prison for one month with hard labor.

LYTTELTON. Monday, April 24. [Before J. Ohivier, Esq., B.M.] Beeach of thb Peaob. —Gustav Watson and William Pawson admitted fighting on Norwioh Quay on Saturday night, and were fined 10a eaoh.

A Desebtbb—David McKenzie, charged with deserting from the barque Mataura, was remanded to Port Chalmers, where the ship is at present. Lunacy.—A prisoner, named John Boyd, who wts transferred some time siEoe to the Lyttelton Gaol from Napier, convicted for fifteen years forwreoking a train, was brought before the Court, and upon the medical evidence of jlrs. Bouse and Macdonald was committed to Sunnyside Asylum. Dbtjnk and Dibobdebly.—Robert Waggett was charged with being drunk and dieorderly on Friday night; Mr H. N. Nalder appeared for the defence. Cornelius Murphy, manager of the bowling alley uni bar of the Lyttelton Hotel, gave evidence an to having refused to let the defendant have any drink, for the reason that he appeared then to be under the influence of drink. That the defendant beoame abusive, and was put out into the street. That on Saturday defendant asked him to compromise the case, and both complainant and defendant went to M r Nalder's office, but complainant doolinod to compromise. Mr Nalder cross-examined complainant at length, and witness denied that when at Mr Nalder's offioe he said he v.'aa sorry ho had given defendant into oaf t )dy, and that he was willing to pay the costs of Court, but not lawyers* costs. He, the | complainant, on Saturday, and the de-

fendant had a drink together, and the defendant then said he had taken out a summons against the complainant for assault. Complainant called a witness to prove that defendant was vory exoited from drink when Constable Allen took him in oharge. The constable testified to arresting the defendant for being drunk and with behaving in a m inner liable to provoke a breach of the peace. Constable Oleary testified that defendant was drunk. Miss Christina Clare, barmaid, testified that defendant came into the bar and said something to her which she did not understand. She called Mr Murphy, the oomplainant, and what took place between them she took no notioe of any further. She considered defendant was intoxicated, and she was a good deal annoyed by him. She had not served him with any liquor whatever. The defendant oalled several witnesses to prove that he was quite sober when the constable arrested him. Tho charge of assault preferred against the oomplainant in the previous oase by the defendant Waggett was heard by the Bench. The case of drunk and disorderly was dismissed against Waggett, and Murphy for assault was fined 10s and all ocsts.

[Left sitting.]