MAGISTRATES' COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XII, Issue 246, 17 October 1877, Page 2

MAGISTRATES' COURT.

TBefore C Hunter Brown, A. S. Collins and .T. Stmons, Esqs., J.J.P.j Using Threatening Language Robert Keliing was charged with using threatening language to David Lindsay to the effect that he would "shoot him like a doc " Defendant pleaded not guilty. Mr Fell appeared for the complainant, and Mr Pitt for" the defendant. Mr Pitt said that if his client was guilty this was an indictable offence, and he did not know how the Bench could deal with it summarily. The Bench having decided to hear the case, Mr iell said that the complainant was be,cretary and overseer to the Upper Motueka Road Board. For some time past he had been in fear of Keliing, who on one or two occasions had been very violent, and threatened to do for him. A short time ago a line of road was laid off by the surveyor to the province. This had .been approved by the Board and commenced, hut afterwards another and better line was discovered, and Lindsay took it that way. Some of the inhabitants, including Keliing, objected to the new line, and Lindsay began to be afraid of him on this account. One morning Lindsay got up and found the following notice on his gatepost: — -'D; Lindsay .—lf you persist in your pigheaded obstinacy, arrogance, and avariciousness, and recommend the Board to make the road to Wakefield along the line you had the audacity to cut without any authority von will be waylaid and shot like a dog the first night you are away from home, if it takes a year to do itl It is more than one who have taken an oath to do for you if you persist in your pig-headed obstinacy! Strong diseases requue strong remedies! Heed this warniug before it is too late! If you do not, be prepared to end your days a miserable cripple for such you most assuredly shall be! Once more and for the last time pay heed to this warning!" If the matter was only a joke it was a very stupid one, if it was serious it was a moat abominable thing. It was almost impossible to fix a thing of this kind, ,but the chief evidence would be the handwriting and style of composition, as Keliing was the only man of education in the district/and no one there but him could hare written it. The following witnesses were then called-— David Lindsay: I am Secretary.aud Overseer to the Upper Motueka Road Board and have been for two years. Defendant lives withiu a mile of me, and I have known him for some time. On two occasions he has got into a great passion without any good reason. Once he shook his fist in my face and followed me up as I retreated, so I picked up a stone to defond myself. He said " Ton I'll do for you yet." Being of so passionate a disposition I have always avoided' him as much as possible. I have lately in my official capacity been making nn alteration in a line of road, and this has met with the disapproval of some of the residents. On the mornitioof the 9th instant when I got up I- found the nolicG produced on the gatepost leading to my house. The handwriting is disguised but I have very little doubt tijat it is Kelling's. Some of the words in it are precisely those used by him to me on previous occasions. I don't believe there is another man in the district who could iiave written it. The petition against the road is sirred by all the residents in the district. * I don't think any of those could have written the threatening notice. Defendant is by far the best educated man in the district. So far as education goes Mr Symes is the only one who can come near him, but I have no reason whatever for thinking that he wrote it. I have not felt at all comfortable since I received the notice. Cross-examined by Mr Pitt: I never told Keliing that I was a fighting man and ho had better mind what he was about. I once told Hickey and another that if I could get no protection from that man I was afraid I should be shooting him some day. The improvement I made in the road would be a benefit to him. It is not the road the petitioners object to, but the man who laid it out That is myself. I was talking to Hickoy about Keliing the night before I got the notice. This I consider was a Providential presentiment. I had a conversation with Burrows and another, who are contractors on the road, about that time. They wanted to draw £10 on their contract, and I suggested they should have more. It was then that J asked Burrows if he remembered having said to me at one time " You are not dead yet." I will swear that I did not write the notice myself. I could not have spelt the woras properly without a dictionary alongside me. J & {

Re-examined: When I said I was afraid I should have to shoot Kelling, I meant in selfprotection. 4 f James Creighton: I live at Stanley Brook. I don't recollect ever having told Lindsay that Kelling was a dangerous man to offend. lam not afraid of him. I never yet saw the man that I was afraid of. Mr Eell: Look at this notice. Have you ever seen it before? Witness: No, not this, but I once saw one very like it, written by you. Mr Eell: Byrne? Witness: Yes. Don't you recollect sending me a notice to the effect that if I did not pay £140 you would sell my property, but as I did not owe you any money 1 took no notice of it. Thomas Griffiths related the incidents of a row between Lindsay and Kelling of which lie had been a witness. Lindsay appeared to be afraid of Kelling. On being shown the notice witness said that he could not recognise the handwriting as Killing's. Cross-examined: I heard Lindsay say in February last that he would hava to shoot Kelling to get his rights. VV. J. Burrows stated that he had made a road in accordance with Lindsay's orders after the February flood. Kelling had objected to this, and said that he would be one on Lindsay yet. Thomas Hickey: Creighton told me that Kelling was riled with Liudsay about the new road. I don't think there are any in the district who can come up to Kelling in the matter of education. Cross-examined: I was at Lindsay's house on the night before the notice was put on his gate. He said that night he was afraid to sleep on account of Kelling, and had been so since the February flood. I heard Lindsay say at one time that if he did not get protection from Kelling he would have to shoot him. This closed the case for the complainant. Mr Pitt said that there was far more evidence to show that Lindsay was the man who posted up the notice, or at all events got some one else to put it there. Kelling would deny it on its oath, and there was not a tittle of evidence to connect him with it. Eobert Kelling: Lindsay and I had a row about the time of the flood, and he tried -to bounce me and accused me of taking his property. I don't remember saying I would do • for him, but I told him I would give him a good thrashing. Cross-examined : I was at home on the night of the 9th instant. I don't actually remember but I don't think I was off my land at all that night. The Bench said the case must be dismissed as that there was no evidence to fix the notice on the defendant, and they could not but comment on the way in which the case had been brought forward as there was not a tittle of evidence, but had it been proved it was a case for the Supreme Court. Mr Fell: I don't understand where the blame is, and should bs glad if the Bench would be more explicit. The Chairman : It was an indictable i offence, and yet was brought merely for sureties of the peace. Mr Fell: Perhaps the Bench are not aware that they were not precluded from committing the defendant for trial. I cannot understand the ground for censure. The Chairman: I can't speak much more plainly. The case is dismissed with costs. Keeping a Disorderly House. James Way was charged by Constable Bradcock with keeping a house of ill-fame iv Rankin's Lane. Defendant was fined £5, or to be imprisoned for two months. Rather than part with the cash he preferred to " take it out." Debt Case. Farrelle v. Melville for £6 3s, for professional attendance. The same v. Tait for £1 12s, for goods supplied. The same v. E. L. Shaw for £5 7s, for good 3 supplied. Mr Pitt, for Mr Acton Adams, appeared for the plaintiff for whom judgment was giveu in all the cases with costs.