A (SLY GROG) DOMESTIC DRAMA.

Kumara Times, Issue 433, 14 February 1878, Page 2

A (SLY GROG) DOMESTIC DRAMA.

Some amusement was caused in the Resident Magistrate’s Court this morning during the hearing of the case Swords v. Stewart. Mrs Stewart, who was convicted of sly grog-selling the other day, admitted the soft impeachment, and intimated that as she had been unable to raise the £25 penalty, she intended to “make a start” on the alternative three months to-morrow. Prior, however, to her retirement from the pomps and vanities of a wicked world, she meant to have a go at Alexander Stewart, a veteran with a quarter-section of sticking-plaster on his head, for the sum of £8 10s 6d sterling. When asked to explain the nature of the claim, and the relationship existing between herself and Stewart, Mrs Swords, with maiden coyness, informed the Bench that some tune in June she had agreed with Sandy to act as his housekeeper, in consideration of a weekly stipend of 10s ; or (on the sole condition that he should quit the halls of dazzling light inhabited by him) that she would pay a like weekly rental for the same. Finally, it was mutually agreed that Mrs Swords should remain as housekeeper, “mend shirts, and that like,” and should, “ of course, your Wortchip, have my own bedroom.” Sandy here east one eye towards the ceiling, and swivelled the other round until it caught that of the learned Counsel for the defence, when it winked mysteriously. Unheedful of the reflection which this action seemed to cast upon the veracity of Mrs Swords, that lady further dilated upon the minutse of their domestic and business arrangements. In order to divert the lady’s ideas to mundane matters within the cognizance of the Court, the Bench courteously enquired if Mr Stewart had ever proposed a settlement. “Yes yer Wortchip,” exclaimed Mrs Swords “When I axed him for money, the willian said ‘We’ll get married, and that’ll settle all,” —an arrangement which Mrs S. further confidentially informed the Bench, was for a variety of

reasons out of the question, the very least of which was that another gentleman possesses a prior claim to her hand and heart. At this stage Mr Price intimated that he was thoroughly seized of the facts of the case from the plaintiff’s point of view, and that she might “step down.” Mrs Swords did step down, and Sandy step’t up, Mrs S. in passing the other S. being particularly careful that he should not touch even the hem of any of her garments. Sandy smacked the Bible with the air of a man who meant business, and then squared himself up to swear. “ Did not the plaintiff,” asked Mr Hawkins in his most dulcet and persuasive tones, “when you asked her to leave your house, leave at once?” “ No, she did’nt,” replied Sandy emphatically. “Well then,” retorted Mr Hawkins with the air of a man on the eve of a discovery that would shake the foundations of society, “well then, she must have remained?” “No she did’nt,” repeated Sandy the imperturbable. “She did’nt go and she did’nt remain,” ejaculated the learned cross-examiner, all the outraged virtue of a lawyer rising within him—“ Now, Sir, you are on your solemn oath ; what did Mrs Swords do? “ Well,” replied Sandy, slowly turning his head so that every one in court might in turn have a full view of the quarter-section, “ She up, and hit me on the head with a two pound weight.” Mr Hawkins intimated that he would not pursue the examination further ; Mr Perkins said that was the case ; and His Worship, smiling blandly, announced his intention to dismiss it.