POLICE COURT, QUEENSTOWN.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Volume II, Issue 73, 9 January 1864, Page 4

POLICE COURT, QUEENSTOWN.

Tuesday, sth January, 1864. (Before Richmond Beetham, Esq., R.M) Assault.—Nichols v. Shannon.—The defendant did not appear. The plaintiff, a miner, stated that he had heard defendant was in the habit of fossicking in their ground, which he told his mates. Defendant afterwards, on the 29th ult., jumped into the paddock where he and a mate were at work, and struck him. His Worship inflicted a fine of £2. Assault.—M'Gee v. Bond. Claim of £2O, damages for assault. Defendant pleaded guilty to the assault, but not indebted to the amount of damages. Mr Campbell appeared for the plaintiff, and stated that both parties were partners together in a certain bridge at Arthur's Point, Shotover, but there was a dispute between them. M'Gee went to cross the bridge on Sunday evening, when Bond demanded 6d toll. Plaintiff said (l Not to-night," and Bond then struck him in the face, and knocked out one of his teeth. The plaintiff stated that he was a partner of Bond's, and therefore had a right to cross the bridge. On the Sunday evening, as he was crossing over, Bond said " I'll trouble you for 6d." Plaintiff said "Not to-night," and then Bond struck him, and followed him across the bridge to the other side again. Gave him no provocation whatever. Only had two front teeth at the time, and Bond knocked one out. John Geddes, miner, residing at Arthur's Point, said that on the evening in question, about seven o'clock, Bond and he were standing at the toll-house. M'Gee crossed the bridge, and Bond asked him for the toll, when he said "Not this blessed night of our Lord." Bond then said he should make defendant go back again, and as M'Gee would not go, struck him in the mouth with his hand. It did not appear to be a heavy blow. Only saw one blow struck His Worship said that the defendant must not take the law into his own hands, or he must pay the penalty. He considered the damages claimed to be excessive, and should only give a verdict for £lO and costs. Thursday, January 7th. Catherine M'Cabe was charged by Detective Lambert with stealing two five-pound notes, the property of James Charlesworth. The prosecutor said he was a digger, residing lately at Queenstown. On Tuesday, the sth of January, gave his wife two £5 notes. One had a blue face, with a figure 5 at the back, the other was of a different color, and defaced or faded. He looked at the numbers, but could not swear to them. The prisoner was in his tent at the time he gave the two notes to his wife; and said he should give her more, as that would not be enough to take her home. She then remarked that he had no more, upon which he opened his purse and showed her its contents. The prisoner almost immediately afterwards left the tent. It was then about noon. After the prisoner had left the tent, he missed the money. The note produced was very like the one he gave his wife, but could not swear to it. Cross-examined —It was the next morning I told you I had lost the money.

T.N the Court —The prisoner came back to the I had missed the money. She might hav& stopped nearly an hour ; and it was after she had left the second time that I missed the money. Prisoner had no £5 notes of her own. Mrs. Charle3worth, wife of prosecutor, deposed that on the day in question, her husband gave her two £5 notes. One was blue, and the other was a very dark and old one. The word Dunedin" was on the blue note in black letters, but could not remember if it was a note of the Bank of New Zealand or New South Wales. The other note was payable in Invercargill. The note now produced was one of those given by her husband. The prisoner on her second visit to the tent, asked her husband to get two shillings' worth of ale, taking out half-a-sovereign to pay for it; she had no notes in her purse when she took out the money. Robert Anderson, storeman at Black and Gordon's, said he received the note now before the Court from the prisoner on Tuesday, the sth inst. She purchased a smoothing iron for 9s, on that evening, tendering the £5 note in payment. Robert Lambert, detective, sworn, deposed that he received information on Wednesday morning, that two £5 notes had been stolen from prosecutor's tent, who suspected prisoner. Made enquiries, and learned that prisoner had been seen walking in the town with a smoothing iron in her hand, which he found she had bought at Black and Gordon's, on Tuesday evening. Asked the storeman what money had been tendered in payment, and if he could recognize the person who bought the iron. He gave the note produced, and said it was a woman who had tendered it. The note corresponded in the main with the description given. Arrested the prisoner, and gave her the usual caution. On being searched, the purse produced was found, which contained three £1 notes, a 5s piece, one shilling, and a ring. Asked her where she had got the £5 note wnich she had changed at Black and Gordon's. She replied she had brought it with her from Melbourne ten months ago ; but Sergeant Naden having pointed out the word « Dunedin," she corrected herself, and said she might have received the note with other moneys since she came to the country. Committed for trial. Obtaining Money under False Pretences. —John Smith was charged with obtaining £1 sterling by false pretences. The prosecutor, A. S. George, deposed that ho was a cordial manufacturer residing in Queenstown. On the 24th December, he bought half a brush fence from prisoner at the back of Johnston's Hotel for the sum of £l. He asked if prosecutor had any objection to pay for it then, as he wanted to pay some sawyers or some men he had employed. He did so. Prisoner then asked him not to remove the fence till after Boxing Day, as there was to be some sport with a pig. He came again on the following Monday and asked prosecutor not to remove the fence then, as he hfld a case in the Court and wished it settled first. He gave the receipt produced in Court, dated 24th December, when the money waspaid. On Tuesday, prisoner came down from the direction of the Court, and said he had just lost a case with the baker, and asked if prosecutor would let him have the fence, and he would give a cord of wood in place of it. Agreed to do so; and on the evening of the same day, he came again and said he had spoken to King, the carter, and had not been able to get the wood, but would let him have it either that evening or the next morning. Prosecutor went to King, who said he had received no orders from the prisoner. Then suspected something wronjj and went to Mr Nankervis about the fence, when he found he had bought it the day previous to that on which prosecutor bought it. Then gave the prisoner in

charge. Cross-examined—When you spoke about a carter, you distinctly mentioned King's name. You came to me and said you had lost the case with the baker, and I was perfectly satisfied to take a cord of wood instead.

Joseph Nankervis deposed that he was a baker in Beach-street, Queenstown. About four or five days before Christmas, he bought some brushwood from the prisoner for 30s. On the 23rd December, he bought the remainder for £l. Gave 10s. then, and the balance since. The wood was lying next Mr Johnston's fencing. Bought the whole of the wood. Mr George afterwards informed him that he had bought the same wood on the 24th December. Had removed all .he brushwood from where it lay, and part of it has been taken to his own place. To the Court—Ten shillings of the money was paid down, as I have stated ; five shillings was for a share in a raffle, and 5s for stores. The prisoner, in defence, said he asked Mr George on the sth January if he would take a cord of firewood instead of the brushwood. He said he was quite satisfied, and would take it. Committed for trial.

The Dunedin Town Board's Notion of Reduction. —The Daily Times says—" There was a meeting of the Town Board on December 31, for the purpose of hearing appeals against the assessment. There was no case of particular interest ; but there were a good many cases in which particularly great astonishment was expressed by the appellants at the decisions come to. Mr Cleve objected to being rated at £720 a-year for his bonded store in High-street. The amount he said, was absurdly high. After some questions had been answered by Mr Cleve, there was a short conference between the members of the Board, and the Chairman said that it had been determined to reduce the assessment to the rate of £2OO a-year for the land and £6OO a-year for the store. The fortunate appellant did not seem to see what he had gained by his appeal; for he declared that this was the most astounding way of "reducing" an assessment that he had ever htard of.

The Canterbury Goldfields.—The following, which is an extract from a private letter, is the latest report which we have received from the Oxford Gold Fields:—" Gold is still found, but in small quantities, and always in greater abundance after a heavy rain, when specks can be plainly seen on the surface. After the last heavy rain I saw minute specks in the ditch by the side of a road through the bush. This must have been washed out from the bush, as no hill rain can reach the place."—Press.