POLICE COURT, QUEENSTOWN.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Volume I, Issue 6, 20 May 1863, Page 9 (Supplement)

POLICE COURT, QUEENSTOWN.

(Before J. Nugent Wood, Esq.) Wednesday, 13th May. M'Gregor v. Glynn.—The defendant in this case, who is an auctioneer and forwarding agent at Kingston, was summoned by John M'Gregor, for illegally disposing of a half-cask of brandy. | The plaintiff stated that he was an hotelkeeper at Waitahuna, and on the 2nd February a half-cask of the best MartelTs brandy was sent by Mr. Stephenson, and left at Mr. Glynn's store for Messrs. Beamish & M'Gregor. It was stored there till the cartage was paid. Plaintiff! applied to Mr. Glynn on Saturday week, when he I was informed that a half-cask of brandy had i been sent by him to Mr. Stephenson two months ago, and that there was nothing there for him. ■■ He afterwards ascertained that some had been j sent to Mr. Wood to sell, very much reduced, ' who had lately sold it to Mr. Cassias. Plaintiff believed that it was his brandy that had been thus sold. Edwin Adamson, clerk to Mr. Glynn, sworn, said he remembered the brandy referred to, which was stored for cartage on the 2nd February. It was put on board the steamer Wakatip, and Hent to Mr. Wood to sell, a sample having been ( taken of it By the plaintiff—l have seen Mr. Glynn broach the cask and take brandy out, filling it up with water. A large tin dish was at his side full of spirit, and he was bottling some off. The bung was out; I came upon him suddenly. The defendant, who appeared much excited, and behaved in a very indecorous and vulgar manner in court, so much so as to call for a reprimand two or three times from his Worship, said brusquely-—'* You've no jurisdiction in the case. Itfs just wasting my time bringing me here." His Worship—l shall give a verdict, Mr. Glynn, at all events, and you may see if I've jurisdiction or not. Mr. Glvnn—By George! It's a string of lies from beginning to end. I shan't bother myself about it at all. I'm going to prosecute that man -. for dishonesty (pointing to Adamson), &c, &c. His Worship—Another such appeal, Mr. Glynn, and I shall commit you for contempt of court Mr. Glynn—l hope you won't do that, your

Worship, but it's enough to make any man swear to see such perjury. Where's my receipt on the delivery of the goods. Let him produce that—but he can't, and until he does that he's got no proof and you can't adjudicate on the case. His Worship considered it necessary that the delivery-receipt should be produced, or that its loss should be proved, and as plaintiff confessed his inability to do either, the case was dismissed. Webster v. Cameron.—This wa? a case of illegal detention of a horse. It appeared that plaintift had bought a horse, the property of Mr. Cameron, from Mr. Wood, with the understanding that the amount of a debt due by the defendant should be deducted therefrom. Three days afterwards Mr. Cameron took re-possession of the horse, which had not yet been paid for. Defendant denied having given Mr. Wood authority to sell otherwise than for cash. The case was remanded till Friday for the evidence of Mr. Wood.