RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S BOARD.

Manawatu Herald, Volume I, Issue 86, 27 June 1879, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S BOARD.

I'oxroN. Wkijuesuay, Juke 25. !j (Before It. Ward, Esq., R.M., and E. S. A Thynne, Esq., J.P.) } FALSE I'UETENCBS. £ John Brett, John Taggart, and Aubrey ' Pevcival were charged with endeavouring 1 to obtain goods under false pretences. Sub-Inspector Goodall prosecuted on be- 1 half of the Crown ; and Mr Staite appeared for Taggart and Pcrcival. Brett was un i defended. Alexander Gray deposed— l am a store- 1 keeper residing at Foxton ; I remember i seeing the defendants on Friday or Satur- ( day week, *he 13th June ; the three of them ( came into my store, and handed me an order ; Brett handed me »n order for some goods : i he said he was going to wo>'k for the G-o- < vernment by contract ; I asked him where ' the work was; he said at the fivemile peg, on the railway ; it was for fencing; Brett said he had a contract from Mr Stewart, District Engineer; I told him that I should require an order from Mr Stewart, or his sanction to the getting of the goods ; he said he wou'd get that ; on another occasion, the week after, I j saw Percival : he came to ask for some more goods to be added to the order ; he was speakinar lo my son before I came in ; when I came in, I asked him where he was going to work ; he said, " We havo a ] contract for fencing on the Railway line ; at the 5 mile peg" I asked him " Who for? "ha said "for the Government." I turned round, and said, " A^y good boy, see | that you don't make a mistake." He said j " I'm sure there's no mistake." I asked him again if it was lor the Government, and ho said it was; I replied to him," Mr Stewart knows nothing about it." He replied, " I know better than that ; have the contract in my pocket ; " I asked him to hand it me ; he did so ; that is the document now before me ; I said 1 would keep the document ; he said, •' Oh no, it does not belong to you ;" I said I will not hand it over to you, any how ;" he then went away ; that is all I know of the affair. Cross examined by Mr Staite — I do not | know any thing against Taggart and Percival ; I believe they tried to swindle me, because they came together ; I think they ] may probably have been deceived by Brett ; ; I was in Court when they were brought up before ; I heard Brett say he was guilty, and the others were innocent ; I would not like to say he spoke falsely ; I have heatd the hand writing on the document is Mr Palmer's; the goods ordered were stores and tools j the parties were to come for them. Mr Staite urged upon the Bench the desirability of the cuse being dealt with in a summary manner. If this were done, prisoners oould plead. Brett was prepared to plead guilty, and to make a statement as to the innocence of the other two men. Sub Inspector G-oodall said there were other charges against Brett, and that he desired to become acquainted with the facts of thn present case before consenting to Mr Staite' s application. The Court said it would bear in mind Mr Staite's application. .Robert George Palmer, stationer, deposed — I remember Brett coiniug to me on the 12th June ; he said he wanted me to write him out an agreement ; that is the document ; no one else came ; Brett dictated the agreement ; the other defendants never came to me regarding this affair; Brett took the document away when it was finished. Sub-Inspector Goodall said that having heard the evidence, he was quite willing to consent to the case beiag dealt with summarily. Taggart and Perciral pleaded not guilty. Brett said— l plead guilty. These other men are inuooeiit. He was proceeding to remark what ho had done, when I His Worship said Brett had better con* fine himself to the particular point, as he might criminate himself upon another charge. The Bench held there was nothing tj connect either Taggart or Percival with the charge, and they were dismissed. Brett was sentenced to four months' hard labor in Wanganui Gaol. i'OROEUY. John Brett was then charged with having forged tho document referred to in the previous case, being an indictable offence. Mr Gray gay« similar evidenco to that in the previous cuse. Aubry Percival deposed — I am a waiter ; 1 reside at the Manawatu Hotel ; Air Brett gave vie tins document to mind for him j i it was about 12 days ago ; he asked me to ' take care of it, as he had no place to put it ; < I gave it to him again, because ho wanted it ' for something upstairs ; Ido not know ' whether any signature was on it ; the stamp • was on it : he gave me it to mind again, and I kept it until I went to Mr Gray's ; ' Mr Brett, Mr Taggart, and Mr Wilson gave • me orders to go down and get the things l ready for the train ; I went to Air Gray*, for the things ; I took the document with me, } and handed it over to Mr Gray ; Brett had j not told me to show it to Mr Gray, or hand l it over ; I showed it to Mr Gray because Mr s Gray said the thing was wrong, and I . thought it was rig it ; I did not notice then \ whether it was signed ; I had heai'd the x document reud out, but do not remember ? whether any signature was read out or not ; I handed it to Mr Gray just as I got itBrett declined to cross-examine. v By the Court — I heard the document read over in the bedroom ; Wilson, Tuggnrt, and Btett were present ; Brett read the document ; he did so because Wilson agreed * to come along with us ; Brett told me the . night we were arrested that Mr Stowart j signed it ; when I took it to Mr Gray I thought it was a proper document. -, Mr Palmer gave evidence similar to that \ given by him iv the previous case. John Tiften Stewart, District Engineer, residing at Foxton deposed — I have soen Brett onco or twice in my office asking for work ; he. asked for fencing work ; I gave J him no work ; the document produced is not . signed by mo ; I gave no one authority to " sign it for me ; I could not give any one authority to do so. v Constable M'Anulty deposed to having 8l arrested Brett for false pretences on June 17 ;ho was accused of obtainiug goods by f presenting this document ; I was present iv 1! Court oh the 18th inst., when Brett aud v two other persons were brought before tho Court ; he pleaded guilty to the charge. I have heard him plead guiity to-day to the sumo charge, when he was sentenced , to four months' imprisonment. „ This closed the case for the prosecution. c Prisoner having beeu duly cautioned, re- „ fused to make any statement, and reserved ■? his defence, . He was then committed for trial tit the " next sittings of the Supreme Court at Wanganui. °' PALSE I>HETENC£B. " John Brett was then charged with ob- n raining money uuder false pretences from h John Futter, of the Manawatu Hetel. This case broke down completely, as ilaintiff admitted that he had given Brett he board, &0,, on the recommendation of tfrs Hillen, who formerly kept tha hotel. BIUJNK AND DISORDERLY. Patrick O'Brien was charged by Con. bt

itiible nt'Anulty with being drunk and lisorderly. Mr Staite appeared for the defence, and ;ook a preliminary objection that on the L2th June O'Brien was brought up charged with a similar offence, and the constable had then stated to Mr Stewart, the Presiding Justice, tha> prisoner had been Irinking for some time. This no doubt bad weighed with hi«n in inflicting the fine of 20s. He thought it was unfair to bring the man up on a Slate demand. His Worship said the Court could take no notice of the matter. The only witness called was the wife of Ihakarn, who made a long, rambling state* innt, regarding her having called at O'Brien's house, for rent due, when he threatened to cut her neck. Constable M'Anulty said he had been informed it was a bad case of drunk and disorderly, but the evidence did not bear out the charge. Case dismissed. THREATENING LAXOUAOE. (Before K. Ward, Esq., R.M., and Ihakara Tukumaru and .Noah Rauhihi, Native Assessors) Eawana Hunia was charged -with using threatening language towards Makere te Ron. Mr Staite appearod for the defence. All witnesses were ordered out of Court. Makere to Rou deposed — I reside at Ilorowhenua ; I know Hunia ; there has been a dispute between Hunia and me ; on May 7, after our dispute, he said, " I will cut your head -with a tomahawk;" lie threatened me ; I could not get into his heuvt to see what was there ; but ho was very angry ; he threatened to cut my head with a tomahawk, at the same time chopping the house; he repeated this several times ; lam a woman, he is a man, I wae frightened ; Napera, Noah, and Oliver Somerville, were there. Cross-examined by Mr Staite — Hunia did this because some timber was taken on to the laud, and I objected ; 1 had threatened to destroy the bullocks of persons going to work for Hunia ; ho was on land he callt his ; it is not his — it belongs to the whole tribe ; wheu he threatened to strike me, he ; mentioned my name ; aud looked me straighl in the face ;he was about 15 feet off : he also mentioned Noah, and threatened to cul I his head ; Hunia has lately come to Horu : whenua to live, and we don't like it ; I don'l know what is in Hunia's heart, but 1 believe he has ill-foeling towards me. By Noah Rauhihi — I correct my statement that Hunia has no claim. Mr Ward — The Court cannot go into the question of title. Napera, another Maori woman, gave confirmatory evidence. She »aid Hunia called out, " Look at my tomahawk ; it is to split your head with." I did not know whethoi it was bouuee, as he had got a bad weapon ; he cut the house ; Makere was close to Hunia ; he was very angry. Cro* s examined — He did not say if they came on his land ; Ido not know about the threats co kill the bullocks ; Idp not know of ill-feeling- between Makero and Hunia ; I know no reason for it ; Hunia and Makere wore quite close ; he threatened Noah also By Noah— Makere and I woro close together; the tomahawk did not strike Makere. Noah te Whata gave confirmatory evidemo. He said — There had been quarreling before, but on the day of the row, when it occurred, we had just arisen from sleep ; Huuia threatened me ; Makere was cooking food just outside the door j he really meant to cv; Makero with the tomahawk, but cut the door instead ; Hunia said, " This tomahawk was used by my ancestors to kill people with, and I will kill you and your children." By Mr Staite — I had no quarrel with Hunia: there were no cattle of Hunia's there, so they could not kill them ; that throat was medo after Hunia had given them uotice mt to go on his land ; he did not do so at the time of the row ; Makero is my daughter; the information was laid four months after the offuuoe. The Court theu aJjourned for one hour. Upon resuming. Mr Baker stated that he had gone down, as Native Officer, to report on the affair to Government, and Hunia hnd then admitted having the tomahawk in his hand. Mr Staite addressed the Court briefly in opening the case for the defence. Kawaua Hunia, being sworn, said — I admit haying the tomahawk iv my baud, aud addressing Noah ; I stated to him I had heard that 40 persons had said if I got the If gatiraukawa bullocks to work on my laud, they would kill them ; 1 said "If a few of you kill bullock* belonging to the Ngatiraukawa tribe, it would be equivalent to killing me ;" the women were some distance away ; I did not threaten Mokere ; I had no iutentiou of hurting Makere ; I did not mention her name ; I have no ill-teeling towards the women. by the Court— The women are living in the same place as before the row ; I went to Noah, the same morning, and said, "My linger is over ; shake hands." Cross-examined by Makere— l did not wish to frighten you. I had a tomahawk in my hand when addressing Noah ; it is, as the Assessors know, a Maori custom to hold t weapon in tho hand when speaking. Pak> said he saw Hunia ou the occasion n question ; he was simply carrying out a Maori custom ; he was telling Noah not to lllow his people to kill the Ngatiraukawa mllocks ; he did not address the women ; jfter the row was over, Huuia shook hands vith Noah. CrosiJ-examined by Makero — I did not ;ee Hunia strike tho house with a tomalawk. Hori Kiremu said ho saw the affair; Huuia had a tomahawk ; ho did not use it ;hreateniugly ; he did not threaten Makere ; Hunia and Noah shook hands afterwards. By the Court — I was in tho house ; Vlarkero was outside ; she lives near biuDia's place, about 50 yards away ; I did lot think Hunia wished to frighten the women. By Makere — I did not see Hunia threaten ou. Eliza Hunia (wife of defendant) corroborated the evidence for the defence. Tho Bench dismissed the case, but yarned Hunia that in future ho must obtain from using the tomahawk, as the Court vas quite determined not to allow Native Lssessors to go about the country flourishng a, tomahawk, and setting a bad exvnplo. Case dismissed. DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. Robert Tiehborne wns charged with being .runk and disorderly on June 19. Dejndant did not appear. John Futter said Tiehborne went into the Innawatu Hotel the worse for liquor, aud runk and disorderly ; I put him out; but a doing so Tichbome tore his clothes. Constable Mo'Anulty deposed that on the ccasion in question his attention was called a Tiehborne, who was staggering drunk ; ut being engaged ou another case, be could ot lock him up. He therefore summoned im. Fined £1 and costs, 7s. CIVIti CASES. Easton v. Hillen.— Claim £16 6s Id, for leatsupplied. Judgment exjaarte for amount ad costs, 158. Jensen v. Rookstrow— Claim £i ss, for alance of wages due. Defendant said he

objected on twogrouuds ; first, that no notice had been given, and second, that no demand was made lor the money.— Plaintiff deposed that he gave defendant a week's notice, but he said if a month's notice were^not given, he could leave any hour he likeq; fc» re» ceived a cheque from defendant for he told him that if he left without notice/ he would stop the cheque at the Bank, and not pay him a pen ny ; he therefore thought it was no use demanding the money. — Hib Worship said the plaintiff had no right to leave defendant's employ without notice ; he should also have demanded the money before taking out a summons, as defendant might have been quite willing to pay. JJe should deduct £1 os, one week's wages, in lieu of notice, and make plaintiff pay the costs of the action. Judgment for £3, plaintiff to pay costs. Easton and Wells v. Bowe & Go. Claim £12, balance of cost of making a waggon Mr Staite appeared for plain jiffs .—Mr Easton, being sworn, said the work was earned out accordiug to agreement, and before the waggon was taken away defendants inspected it. Cross-examined — I agreed to make it to carry 10 tons ; I cannot swear whether or not it will. Mr Bowe ! said one of the parties was to have gone to see the affair work, and that as they took it ! on that condition, they did not legally get ! possession. His Worship said defendants must pay the money, but would have their action at law for breach of contract against plaintiffs. Judgment for amount and costs. j Macarthy v. I'errenu. — Claim £10. Mr ; Staite appeared for plaintiff, and said the : action was brought owing to defendant ob- ' stiuetinghis client in the carrying on of a j coutract.— Timothy Macarthy deposed— l iam a contractor residing inFoxton ; I have ; a contract with the Foxton Local Hoard i ' (contract produced) ; I signed that contract ' ; with Robinson as co-contractor ; Robinson ! never started the work ; I employed Perieau i ' to work on the contract, he getting 7s per > ' day for each of his teams ; Robinson is L ! working 12 miles away ; ho represented to • ' me that Perreau was working for him, and ' > wanted me to take him as a partner, but I > 1 declined , I cannot work with l'erroau ; he 5 refused to do the work us I wanted, and - i would not leave it I told him I would send ' ' a policeman, but could not find one; I have k sustained damage to the extent of £10, and | been kept idle; since the' summons was t • issued, he has persisted in working. Cross- ' ! examined by Mr I'erreau — I signed a tender i for this work ; you have obstructed mo in i Contracts Nos. 1 and 3 ; 1 know the .tender j accepted was signed Robinson and party ; ! i I had no dealings with Robinson in the ' matter ; I used his name for reasons of my ■ I own ; «s far us tha Board was concerned, ■ ! no one but Robinson and myself were inter- ' i ested ; I engaged first -with Robinson and ■ afterwards personally with you to haye your > teams ; I twice saw you, but you refused to ' . let me have your teams ; I positively deny j that you gave me a letter on the 20th May I from Robinson stating that he had engaged - 1 | your teams ; you interfered with the woik Iby refusing to remove some timber ; you | also refused to leave the work ; you hindered 1 | me by standing in my way when I wanted ■ to work. — J. A. Perreau said he was engaged ! by Thos. Robinson to provide two teams, j ove of which witness was to drive : Robinson gave him the note produced ; lie asked Maoarthy to ondorse receipt of the letter ; he had nothing to .do with Macarthy ; he i had not received any money for work from I Robinson.— Mr Robinson was put in the ; box and swore that he still is a partner in theoontraot, and was represented by Mr Perroau. — An argumant here tooic pk^^^. between Mr Ward and Mr Staite, as -Co"---whether Mr Robinson could still be regarded as a partner. The case was adjourned until Wednesday next, aud ilia Court rose at -t p.m.