RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XI, Issue 122, 15 May 1876, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

[Bef6re L. BnoADi E q.^R.M ] Samuel . O'Connor, was ' eharged by George ABbqroft : with refusing to.d.eliver up his rail.^vav c tJ-iWet \on 'the^d^nfajd? of the ser^ariV^ authorised to col ect tliVsYme cn the 3rd inst. * Mr. Acton Adans appeared for the complainant, and Mr. Pitt for the defendant. fieorge Ashcroft : lam gen ral manager of the railway. Arthur Sheppard, the regular Kpard,^ vras assisted py pthers on the day In question; Om arrival iii.JSelsdnif O'Connor refused to give up bis ticket, ahd'l gave him j in charge. Crors examined : Tbere was a crowd round. Sheppard had laid hold of,o'Connor,.who said. *' Are we to be pulled about in this way ?" Shepp-ird appear .*d to me to be ; perfectly sober. O'Connor did not- tell nie he had given up his ticket. Arthur Sheppard : I Wsß iri charge Of the " train' on the 3rd -May. Burge and Maclaren were authorisedibf me to collect tbe tickets from the carriages, and 'Kershaw from the opsn trucks. On arriving at the station, I -* tsked O^Connbr for his ticket, and he tried'to push past me. I laid hold of bim by the back of the neck, and the aim, until Mr Ashcroft came up. I Birear that I did not hit him He did not B*y thafc be had giren up hiß ticket. O'Connor was hot sober. I wiis. 7* William Maclaren : I assisted Sheppard to collect the tickets on thefSrd of May: On arriving iri Nelsoi 'I h'eard ; 4 squabble, and saw that Sheppard had bold of defendant Mr Ashcroft came up and asked me if I knew defendant's name and address I iail I did, when Mr Ashcroft told Sbeppar 1 y tof let him gol I did not hear defendant say anything about his tiuket.7: 7-Croßs-exumioed: O'Connor was excited. It might have arisen from the struggle, but I don't think so. This olr.sed the caie for the complainant. JMr Acton Adorns said that he, was instructed to ask that the fine, if aoy, miglk be as light ns possible, as the railway authorities merely wisne 1, to let the public know .tba*; they could not commhVa breach of the regulations with impunity. = Mr Pitt in opening the case for the.defehce said that there was no case whatever, as no proof had be«-n adduced of the defendant's : oversaving h-id a ticket at all, and , if the chnrge had been one of traT.elling without a ticktt it should have bpen lail under Vnbther section of the Act. He was surprised tbat the guard- Sheppard should* pet into the boxand ttuke such statements against the 'defend- A *nt as that . he had used foul language and had been driinkj when there was not the slightest foundation for them, as he should prore. -"The facts of the case* were that the defendant got bis ticket from Maclaren, and on the way up gave it to Kershaw, who .was acting as guard.. 'On .Sheppard asking for .his ticket defendant told him what he shad done with it, when he (Sheppird) struck him on the face, and then seized bold of him in a very rough manner. It was disgraceful and intolerable that the. publip.jsh.puld Jie treated in this way. His ciilßnt'had'flrst of" all b*en injured by being struck, and then insulted by" being told told that he was drunk, when hs was in a perfect state of sobriety. Mr Pitt then called r Samuel O'Connor : I wasf^ passenger by . the train on the 3rd inst. I got a "ticket from* Maclaren, which I gave up to Kershaw. Iwo others who: were with me gave up their tickets at the same time. All I had had to drink that day was one glass; ol beer; ' Sheppard was the worse for* liquor. When he asked, for. my ticket. I said I had giren it up to another guard. He Baid I could not ' have dono so, and I said if he would go back to the carriage with me I could prore it. He .then struck .-me on tbe face, and afterwards laid hold of m very roughly. 7'. '••//_•">"• James -Kershaw : I am porter on the line. Mr Aehcroft sent me with the train on the 3rd in»t, ssying.l might.be nteful. I.collected. ticket's from [ two carriages, though' I -had no authority to do so. v v t7i. . Charles Moore: I was in the carriage with o'OonnorT We all gave up onr tickets to Kershaw. I ,saw O'Connor give his. Mr Ashcroft was'present at the time. ■ y At this stage of the proceedings, Mr Acton: Adams stated that the case for tbe complainant hai broken down, and that there would be no occasion for further evidence. Ho only regretted that the defendant had not informed Mr. Aihrroft at the time that he had giren up his ticket, as such a etttement woud have effectually stiyed the procedibgß. The case was then dismis«ei with costs. - Mr. Pitt applied for professional costs, as tbe case was one wh'ch might have involved certain technicalities which would have rendered professional assistance neec s- ary. , Hia Wobshijp said that had ihe information been laid by the guard hef should have allowed them, but under tha circumstances he., should do not do so, as there was no doubt ithat Mr. Ashcroft was only doing tbat which,, he believed to be his duty. ■■■_. Stbiks.w ...J; Barley, i Mr Fell appearel for plaintiff ani Mr Acton Adams for defendant. Action to. recover ; £66.. -Plaintiff^s. . case wave that be was engajed in defendant's soda water manufactory, for sir months, at. £3 per _ week, to perform certain work. Shortly after,; the engagement was nnde, plaintiff requested' him to bottle. * This bring work that.. required; a certain amount of skill, and was also attended with'damjer, owing to bottles occasionally bursting, higher wages were üßunliy pud . to those engaged at it. Defendant jre fuied ,to bottle, and plaintiff .thereupon, told him to put on his coat and go. He therefore sued,, for the full, amount of the six monthsVwngns ,-\ The defence was that there had been no, ogre, ment for six months, and that defendant was expected to do any work that was, required of him. After hearing., evidence at considerable _ length, his Worship gave judgment for two weeka' wagesTfifii and costs j£6 Is. ' L r