RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, BLENHEIM.

Marlborough Daily Times, Volume II, Issue 108, 2 April 1880, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, BLENHEIM.

Tuesday, March 30th (Before H. Melntire, Esq., R.M.]

There was no criminal business before the Court. The following civil cases were disposed of Judgment was given for plaintiffs in the undermentioned undefended cases:—H. Jellyman v. Gibbs, £3 10s, the amount of a butcher’s bill; same v. Philpott’s, £4 14s lid; same v. Grainger, £1 19s order for payment in a week, with the alternative of 14 days’ imprisonment; Parker v. Pascoe £lO 9s 7d; same v. O’Sullivan £6 18s lOd. BTSHELL V. JELEYMAN AND CHINO. This case stood ever for judgment from a previous court day. The action was for harvesting, a claim of £l7, and the substantial defence was the work was badly done. The Court gave judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed less £5 16s and costs. PARKER V. DESMOND. This was a claim for £l7 3s 6d. Mr Sinclair appeared for defendant, and put in a plea of bankruptcy and discharge. Mr Parker said the bankrupt had got his discharge without the creditors knowing it. The fact had not been published. An application for his discharge had been made and refused, but afterwards he got it somehow. It appeared that Mr Desmond had paid into Court the sum of £1 18s, for which amount judgment was given with costs. POKKISS V. COEOHORN. This was a claim for £2 Ss for arrears of rates due to the Lower Wairau Board of Conservators. Mr Sinclair appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Rogers for the defence. The defence was that Dr Cieghorn was not liable, as he was not the occupier of the premises during any portion of the period, for which he was rated. The Borough valuation was made in January 1870, Dr Cieghorn being then a tenant of Mrs Wall. The premises, a surgery, etc., Market St., were burned down on the 27th February, and the rate -was struck in May. The plaintiff’s counsel contended that as Dr Cieghorn had made no objection to his name being on the roll, he was liable. The loth February was the latest day for lodging objections. The fire took place a few days afterwards. Mr Sinclair quoted a decision of Mr Bathgate’s, late R.M. at Dunedin, in support of the view that Dr Cleghorn under the circumstances, was liable for the rates, as he had not made his objection at the proper time in the Assessment Court. He also quoted from Mr Gordon Allan’s argument in the case of Hawke v. the Greytown Local Board in the Court of Appeal. Mr Rogers contended that Dr Cieghorn was not the tenant of the premises at the time for which the rate was levied. Several authorities were cited. Mr Sinclair observed that the amount in dispute was so small that it would hardy “ run an appeal,” but it was a very important case, and several others were dependent

upon it, both as regarded Borough and other The Court reserved judgment until next Monday. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. HAVELOCK. Saturday, March 27tii. [Before W. E. Dive, Esq., J.P.] DRUNKENNKSS AND RESISTING THE POI.ICE. George Erikson, charged with being drunk at Havelock on the 25th March, pleaded guilty and was fined 5s and costs 7s, or 24 hours imprisonment. Martin Andrew Bergemann, charged with a like offence was also fined 5s and 7s costs. George Erikson was further charged with violently resisting Constable Glachan in the execution of his duty on the 25th March at Havelock, and pleaded not guilty. Constable Glachan, on oath, said—l was on duty on the 25th instant. Between 9 and 10 o’clock p.m. I saw the prisoner at Hutcheson’s. I followed him with Sergt. Adams, who cautioned him. I took prisoner in charge and Bergemann interfered. I then put the handcuffs on and locked him up. Sergeant Adams was present the whole time. I struck prisoner in self-de-fence. I was brought down by Sergeant Adams, and found prisoner at Hutcheson’s. The men were drunk. The men left and passed at the back of Brownlee’s store. The captain was with them. I used the baton and broke it when I struck him.

Sergeant Adams, on oath, said—l was on duty on the 25th instant. I relieved Glachan about 9 p.m. I saw three sailors in the All Nations’ Hotel. They came down the street, and I saw one of them commit a nuisance in the street. The prisoners used bad language and refused to go on board when I told them. I went for Constable Glachan and we saw the men at Hutcheson’s. I told Mr Hutcheson not to supply them with any more drink. Glachan took prisoner in charge. Prisoner struck him and knocked him down. Prisoner was very violent. The Captain threatened to give the men in charge unless they went on board. We both used our batons in selfdefence. I only used mine once. I did not use the switch but had it with me. I got my baton and switch because If eared resistance. I told Glachan to bring his baton. Johan Gorgansen, on oat l, said— l am master of the Maud Graham. I came on shore about 5 p.m. on the 25th instant, and the men were loading a punt in the evening and finished about 9 p.m. Shortly after that I was going on board. The men stopped at the bridge on the beach. I heard the Sergeant cauEoi them and 1 went away. I told the Sergeant I wanted the men to go on board. I did not see the police untir they came round the corner near the bridge. I did not want to be present and left to go on board. The men were in liquor. I only gave them 10s between three men.

Francis Leigh Riley, on oath, said—l am a duly qualified medical practitioner. lam duly registered and reside at Havelock. 1 examined the prisoner’s wounds. They were severe at the back of his head, and were caused no doubt through being struck with the constable’s baton, or an instrument like it.

In consideration of the punishment already inflicted the prisoner was cautioned and discharged. Martin Andrew Bergemann, who was charged with a similar offence pleaded guilty, and was also cautioned and discharged. Mr McNab appeared for the defence and commented strongly on the conduct of the police, who, he contended, had greatly exceeded their duty, and used far more violence than was justifiable.