S.M. COURT.

King Country Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 340, 25 February 1911, Page 5

S.M. COURT.

TE KUITI —THURSDAY. (Before Mr F. G'B. Loughnan, S.M.), CIVIL CASES. Judgment by default was given in the -following cases: —Hattaway (Mr Finlay) v. Taniwha (Mr Sharpies). £l2 Us 7d, costs £2 ISs (id. payment argeetl to be made at £2 per month; Green and Colebrook (Mr Hine) v. R. Kerr, £4 17s sd, costs £1 Os 6d; B'ackman and Cobb (Mr Hine) v. R. Kerr, £4 4s Bd, costs 15s 6d; C. Stevens (Mr Hine) v. Rewatu and Rataima,£2 lis 4d, costs £2 8s; same v. Rewatu, £7 4s lOd, costs £3 3s 6d; same v. Taitoko, £lO 2s, costs £2 15s; same v. Corburn, £4B Ss, costs £5 5s 6d; Parks v. Graham,. £2 lis 6d, costs £3 14s Bd.

CRIMINAL

William Foster was charged that on Wednesday he was drunk in a railway carriage, that he did assault Angus McGill, and that he used obscene language. Thomas Burns was also charged with being drunk on the train and with committing a grossly indecent act. Both accused pleaded

guilty to the charge of drunkenness and not guilty to the other charges. Evidence was given by the railway guard and a porter as to the conduct of Foster. He was fighting and using bad language. There were other men in the train who were drunk and behaving in a similar manner. The railway carriage was locked after passing Wilson's siding and the matter reported to the police, and the accused were arrested. Foster was the ringleader. Angus McGill said he was a traveller by the same train and that he had been hit in the mouth by Foster without any provocation. He had also been knocked off the train at Otorohanga. The language and conduct in the train he had never before experienced. Witness was sober and only had a few drinks.

In reply to accused witness said that he did have a nip out of a bottle of whisky, but did not remember helping them to drink the bottle. Accused denied having hit McGill or throwing him out of the carriage. He said there were a number of men in the compartment and they were all dancing, singing and fighting. McGill was carrying on the same as the rest.

His Worship said that no doubt a number of men had gone for a day to have a wild debauch and that all in the carriage were under the influence of liquor. He was satisfied that McGill was also drunk and participating in the horse play and uproarious behaviour of all concerned. He was satisfied that all in the carriage were drunk and acting wildly. He would therefore not single out the accused for punishment. Evidence showed that obscene language had been used by the accused and that it also was general in the compartment. Accused would be fined £3. On the charge of drunkenness he was fined £l.

Thomas Burns was fined £3 and costs 9s for drunkenness and on the charge of committing an indecent act was dismissed. SLY-GROG CASE.

C. B. Holloway and Leonard Holloway, two residents of Aria, were charged with four counts each of keeping liquor for sale. Leonard Holloway was further charged with supplying a native. Mr G. P. Finlay appeared for accused Constable Mathews deposed that from information received as far back as July 1909 he had had various complaints about these two men sly-grog seiling at Aria. Witness had complaints in writing. James Reardon, storekeeper and postamster at Aria, stated that he had never made any complaints against accused. He had made complaints that grog was being sold because he saw people the worse for liquor. It was common knowledge. Witness did not tell the police. At various times there had been a considerable amount of drunkenness at Aria. He made complaints that grog was being sold in Aria because he saw people the worse for liquor. The fact of grog being sold was common knowledge. At various times there had been a considerable amount of druunkenness at Aria, By Mr Finiay: He had known that a number of men in the township were very rowdy on two occasions about November. Paehi Hua Tohengaroa, a native, said that be had never bought any whisky from the Hollnways, but had asked Leonard Holloway for whisky for medicinal purposes. Holloway gave him a half bottle of whisky. That was about two years ago. He had never told the police that he had bought six bottles of whisky from Holloway at 10s pet bottle. By His Worship: Witness told the constable that he had got whisky from Holloway for medicinal purposes. He was suffering from a chest complaint and wanted a cure for it. After he got the whisky he was in bed three days. Witness had told Holloway that he had been summoned to give evidence against him but did not tell him what he had told Constable Mathews. His Worship: Do you expect me to believe you? Witness: Yes. His Worship: Well, I don't. Mr Finiay said that in view of the circumstances which had arisen he would nut both accused in the box. The defence was that C. B. Holloway had not had liquor for some time and that Len Holloway had only brought one 'bottle of whisky from Hamilton about three months ago. C. B. Holloway stated that he had not any liquor in Aria for the past six months. He knew the '"invalid" but had never seen his brother supply him with liquor. By Constable Mathews: Witness could not account for the large number of empty cases in the swamp. Fourteen bottles of whisky that were stolen from the swamp did not belong to him. He never got liquor

from Awakino in assumed names. Witness had seen drunken people in Aria.

j By Mr Finlay: There were I "drunks" and long periods of quieti ude in Aria.

Leonard Holioway stated he had only brought one bottle of whisky into Aria for the past six months. He had given the native some whisky but that was about two years ago. Witness had never put liquor in the swamp and had never procured any in a false name. By Constable Mathews: Witness did not get whisky addressed to Callighan. He had never sold any whisky. He never got liquor in under fictitious names.

H. E. Lewis, coach proprietor on Te Kuiti-Aria route, stated that he had never brought any liquor in for the liolloways since July. His Worship, in giving judgment, said the allegation that sly-grog selling was rife in Aria was not evidence. There was no evidence that the Holloways had liquor in their possession. The evidence offered was not proof and he could not take suggested evidence. Gentlemen who were interested in the advance of their district often fell into error and thought that because they saw drunkenness slygrog was going on. That was not so. The evidence showed neither signs of sly-grogery nor suspicion of it. Hedismissed the case.

With regard to the charge of supplying a native preferred against Len Holioway, his Worship said that on account of the length of time that had elapsed he would also dismiss that charge.

AN ASSAULT. A charge of assault was preferred by Rangi Marie Hirsthorne (Mr A. F. Howarth) against Martha Turner (Mr Broadfoot). Both are residents of Oparure. Complainant stated that the house defendant lived in was rented from her mother and both houses were situated in the same grounds. She went to pick apples and the defendant's sister and her came to blows with the result that the defendant hit her with a pair of tongs. Defendant did not deny using the tongs. Rangi was ill treating her sister, who was in a weak state of health and she interfered. His Worship dismissed the. case with costs amounting to 375. BUSH FELLING CASE. G. K. Smith (Mr Sharpies) v. A. McHolm (Mr Finlay).—This was a case in which the plaintiff sued the defendant for the sum of £lO, being a balance due from a bush contract. Defendant deducted the ardour-re-alleged careless and negligent wor Plaintiff in his evidence stated f hat the work had been inspected and passed by defendant. Several visits had beer, made by the owner of the bush and no objections had been made. The defence was that the work had been negligently done, and his Worship in giving judgment for defendant referred to the unreliability of the evidence of the plaintiff and witness. Co3ts amountintg to £9 16s were allowed.

Shipley (Mr Finiay) v. Warbrick Bros. (Mr Hine). —A claim of £lO for wages earned as cook and bushfelilng. Judgment for £5. Holby (Mr Sharpies) v. Melton (Mr Finla)y.—Claim for wages £2 9s 6d. Judgment was given for plaintiff for 245, without costs, to be paid when he had returned straps and timber which he had in his possession. Balance was disallowed on account of insubordination.