RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5072, 26 June 1877, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Monday, June 25. (Before J. C. Crawford, Esq., 8.M.) DRUNKENNESS,

Peter Jacobs was charged with having been drutk and creating a disturbance on Saturday night. Fined 10s. and costs, or in default to be sent to gaol for 48 hours. A woman’ named Eliza Conway, against whom a charge of drunkenness was laid, did not answer when called upon, and his Worship ordered her bail to be forfeited.

Thomas Murray, another victim. flowing bowl, pleaded guilty when he was asked whether he had been drunk incapable, and he was fined ss. and costs, thk usual alternative being allowed.

A PAUPER AND A LOAFER. G. Hoover was brought up under the Vagrancy Act, being a notorious character for loafing round and living by begging, which he carried on systematically. He was sentenced to one month’s imprisonment, with hard labor. PECULIAR ASSAULT CASE. -James Shiels was charged with that he did, on the 23rd inst., violently assault James Gould.

James Gould deposed that he was in UrwinV Hotel on the 23rd. Went in for a glass of beer. Had not been there above a minute when the prisoner knocked him down, and hurt him badly about the face, knocking one of his teeth out and blacking his eye. He was knocked senseless.

By Prisoner : I never said my brother was the best comic singer in the colony. I did not call you a bastard. Prisoner said prosecutor called him a “ thing” and a bastard before he struck him. The case was put hack for a while till the prosecutor brought his witnesses. Frank Broughton deposed that ,he saw the complainant badly bruised. Witness pulled prisoner off complainant. Clara Clark, a barmaid at TJrwm’s Hotel, stated that Gould was standing in the bar, and was muttering something, when prisoner ran. round into the bar and struck Gould. To Prisoner: You struck Gould first. I did not hear Gould say anything. Mr. Crawford said it appeared to be a most unaccountable case of assault, as it seemed that there had not been the slightest provocation for it. He asked if anyone in court could speak to prisoner’s character. Sain Howard said prisoner had been in bis employ as property fman at the Theatre for over three years, and he had always behaved himself so fax as he (Mr. Howard) knew. His Worship said the case wns one of the most unprovoked assault, and but for Mr. Howard’s testimony prisoner would jnobably have been severely dealt with. As it was, he would impose a fine of 505., with costs, or in default 14 days* imprisonment, BREACH OF THE LICENSING LAWS,

J. Wilkins was charged with selling liquor on a Sunday, the 17th instant, at his licensed house, the Railway Hotel, Upper Hutt. He pleaded not guilty. A lot of evidence was taken, chiefly going to show that the persons were travellers seen by Constable Gillespie in defendant’s house on the occasion in question. The Magistrate said there were two points in the case, namely, whether a person who walked from the Silver Stream and back can be called a traveller; and whether persons who have their meals at a hotel on Sundays can be called lodgers. Certainly it was rather hard that a person who dined at a hotel on Sundays could not have his dinner-beer. Having doubts on the subject, he would dismiss the case. ALLEGED PERJURY. The much-talked of case in which Constable Lyster, of the Upper Hutt, was charged with committing perjury in his evidence at the last meeting of the Licensing Court for the Hutt District came off yesterday. The information was as follows:—“That David Dyster, on the 13th day of June, 1877, at the Lower Hutt, being duly sworn as a witness giving evidence before the Licensing Conrt there, and tbefe sitting in the matter of the application of one Thomas George Dugard for a publican’s license for a house known by the sign of the Criterion Hotel, there lawfully being heard and inquired into by the said Court, be falsely, wickedly, and corruptly swore and deposed in substance and to the effect following, that is to say:—‘ The landlady, if she is Mrs. Dugard (meaning thereby the wife of the said Thomas George Dugard), kisses men for drinks. I was in the Criteiion with Constable Carrol and Constable Smart and others on the day they came to the Upper Hutt. She kissed Constable Carroll. Carroll put his arms round her neck, and she kissed him.’ ” Sir. Barton appeared for the prosecution; Mr. Buckley for the defence. The first witness called was

Thos. George Dugard, who, being sworn, deposed : I am a publican, residing at the Upper Hutt. I am married. My wife’s name is Annie Elizabeth Dugard. lam keeping the Criterion Hotel. We are carrying on business there. I applied for a renewal of my license at the last meeting of the Licensing Court held at the Upper Hutt. Constable David Lyster was examined as a witness in connection with that application. Mr. Crawford, Mr. Beetham, and another whose name I do not know were sitting on the Bench on that occasion. Constable Lyster objected to the granting of tke license on the ground, as he said, that it was a rowdy house. He swore to this effect—“ The landlady, if she is Sirs. Dugard, kisses men for drinks." When asked who she kissed for drinks, Lyster mentioned a constable, and mentioned Constable Carroll.

By Mr. Buckley ; I was net present when the kissing as alleged by Lyster took place. I was in town. The oath Lyster took was to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing hut the truth. Ido not remember precisely who swore Lyster. I think it was Mr, Crawford. I was not present at my hotel on the day in question. I cannot say whether the kissing took place, of my own knowledge. I laid the information because my wife and Constables Smart and Carroll swore that no kissing had taken place, and that Constable Lyster was a liar. I have never accused any one of kissing Mrs. Dugard. I never accused a man named Fulton of. improper intimacy with my wife. I turned him out of my house. I will not say whether I threatened to shoot him. Let him prove that. Mr. Buckley pressed the question. Mr. Barton interfered, and pointed out that the question being irrelevant to the case wag not legitimate. Mr. Buckley contended that he was entitled to test the credibility of the witnesses, and moreover, in the interests of his client, he must ascertain whether Mrs. Dugard had “ kissed men for drinks,” as those appeared to be the words upon which the information was laid.

Examination was continued, but witness fenced with the question about threatening to shoot Fulton. He refused to answer, Mr. Crawford, being appealed to by counsel for defendant, ruled that the question must bo answered. Witness : Well, I did threaten to sboot him. Mr. Buckley ; What for? Witness ; For creating a disturbance in my house. I will not state the nature of the disturbance, or how it arose. ■ Argument between counsel on the point ensued. Ultimately the matter was set at rest by Mr. Buckley intimating that lie would refrain from further cross-examination. Wm. Henry Quick deposed ; I am a solicitor. I was acting for Mr. Bugard at the last Licensing Meeting for the Hntt District. I was appearing on behalf of Mr. Dngard in consequence of an adverse report sent in by Constable Lyster, who was sworn to give evidence in support of the charge he had made. The members of the Bench were Mr. Crawford, Mr. Bcetham, and Mr. Grace. Constable Lyster swore the house was badly conducted ; that drunkenness and fighting took place there. He also said these words, “ Mrs. Dngard—l do not know whether she is or no t—allows herself to be kissed for drinks.” I asked him if he was speaking of his own knowledge, and he replied, “Yes, I saw it.” One man, be said, offered to “shout” all round if Mrs. Dngard would give another man a kiss, and she immediately kissed the last-mentioned man, who, after repeated questions, I ascertained from the witness was a constable named Carroll. Bv Mr. Buckley : I do not remember who administered the oath to Lyster. I feel morally certain that he was sworn, but I would not swear.

Re-examined by Mr. Barton : Had there been anything unusual in the oath as administered to Lyster I should have remarked it. John Gillespie, sworn, deposed : I am a police constable stationed at the Upper Hutt. I was present at the last meeting of the Hutt Licensing Court held at the Lower Hutt, and when Dugard’s appdication for a license for the Criterion Hotel was heard Constable

Lyster was examined in connection with the j. - case. Ho was sworn. I heard his evidence. Had-Ijot seen any familiarity -between Mrs. Dugar-i and Constable Carrol] while I was at the Cmt' r ‘ ou - Heard some one talk of kissing, but hid not know who spoke about it. I saw Mrs. Dugard kiss her hand to some one, but do not know who. Win. Hall, laborer, corroborated the words stated in the information. Anne Elizabeth Dugard deposed : I am the wife of Thomas George Dugard, landlord of the Criterion Hotel, Upper Hutt. I know Constable Lyster, who has been at the house on several occasions. IXo has shaken “Yankee

twab ” for drinks with my husband and others several times. I remember Constables Smart, Carroll, and Lyster coming to the house on the 14th May. On that occasion Constable Carroll did not kiss me, nor did I kins him. When they came they asked to be directed to a bouse in the neighborhood with which I was unacquainted. They then went away, and subsequently came back. It is about three months since we took the hotel It is not the fact that I am in the habit of “ kissing men for drinks.” This is the first hotel we have kept. Prior to that we lived in Wellington. We lately came out from England by the Avalanche. I’ll defy any one to say that I kiss men for drinks. I did not kiss Carroll on the day spoken of, nor at any other time. It is not true that he put his arm round my neck. When Carroll came in he had a man known as “Big Davey” with him. They went into a parlor, called for drinks, and invited Lyster, who had a glass of beer. They also invited Gillespie, who at first declined, but afterwards had a glass of beer. They also called for a bottle of brandy, and paid for it. Carroll objected to the brandy as not being case brandy, and said he would not drink it. “Big Davey” said, “ If she kisses you will you drink it ? ” and asked me, “ Will you kiss him ? ” I said, “Ob, certainly,” and kissed my hand to him. By Mr. Buckley : I never kissed Constable Carroll. I never put my arms round his neck, nor did bo put his arms round mine. X would not allow a man to do so. I know Mr. Fulton. Whether I ever kissed him or not has nothing to do with the case. I have known him from a child. I decline to answer the question.

Mr, Buckley said he proposed to show by evidence that what Constable Lyster had sworn to was absolutely true. He called Constable David Smart, who deposed to visiting the Criterion Hotel, Upper Hutt, on the day in question. Was not on duty at the time, and was in plain clothes. Had drinks at the hotel. Mrs. Dugard served them. We were all jolly together. Carroll seemed displeased about something. I said to Mrs. Dugard, “Go and give him a kiss.” She put her arms round his neck, but I could not say on oath whether she kissed him or not. I don’t remember anything being said about tf shouting all round.” Witness shouted twice. Witness had been himself kissed sometimes, (Laughter.) By Mr. Barton : We were all in plain clothes. We consider we may do things in plain clothes which we should not do when in uniform; such as smoking a pipe, drinking in a public-house, or passing a joke like another man.

Mr. Barton: If Lyster afterwards in a Court of Justice adduced the circumstances which took place as a good proof that the house had been kept in a disorderly and improper manner, would he be swearing truthfully and fairly ? —Witness : There are two questions there. I did not see any disorderly or improper conduct. I saw nothing done that could he a ground for taking away the license. Lyster did nob protest against Carroll’s conduct or mine. I did not take notice of Mrs. Lyster having a tray in her hand. We were all jolly together. Dugard spoke to me on Sunday week about this case. He asked me if Mrs. Dugard had kissed Carroll. I said she had not; but she was present, Carroll was not. By Mr. Buckley : I did not want to let on upon the woman, nor create any unpleasantness between Mr. Dugard and his wife ; but it is a fact that she did put her arras round Carroll’s neck, but whether she actually kissed him or not X could not say.

George Fulton (who asked who would pay his expenses, and was told) deposed : I live at the Upper Hutt, and remember the day when Carroll, Smart, Lyster and others were at Dugard's hotel. I know Mrs. Dugard, and imagine X have known her from a child. As Carroll and I were coming out Mrs. Dugard stood at the door and would not let. us go.

Smart said, “ A. good -looking woman like yon .would please Tim (Carroll). Go and kiss him, and Tim will shout for all hands ; or if he won’t I will.” She went up to him, put her arms round his neck, and kissed him on the cheek. I won’t say whether I ever kissed Mrs. Dugard. You (Mr. Buckley) want to get a case against me. Mr. Buckley : No, I do not. Witness : I would not trust you. I tried to settle the matter with Dugard, and he threw a bell at my head. I’ve been told he threatened sfipot me. He had assaulted me. By Mr. Barton : I have kissed Dugard’s wife twenty times. She has kissed me when he was in town. Mrs. Dugard would send for me. The messenger was a man whoso name I don’t know. He works for Mr. McKirdy. Sometimes I went. lamoneof the Tapscot crew, I have knocked Dugard down when he assaulted me. I will not say whether or not lam the man who shot the captain of the Tapacot. By Mr. Buckley : I had a six-years’ character from the captain of the Tapacot. I have been in steady work at 14s. a day for the last three years. Timothy Carroll, police constable, deposed to being at Dugard’s place on the 14tU May, in company with Smart, Lyster, and others. X was standing at the end of the table. The rest were sitting down. I felt dissatisfied, and

wanted to leave the room, when Smart said, “ If you’ll go to Carroll and give him a kiss, he’ll bo all right.” She put her arms round me and kissed mo onco. Smart then “ shouted." By Mr. Barton : Dngard asked me on Sunday week what took place. I told him “it was all fun.” I did not say that Mrs. Dugard had not kissed me. I said Lyster had no business to mention at the Hutt Court what occurred in the room. This concluded the evidence.

Mr. Buckley submitted that he had clearly established that what Constable Lyster had sworn was true.

Mr. Barton said he would not object to the Court dismissing the ease, but submitted that Lyster ought not to have made the complaint against Dugard’s licensed house, with a view to getting the license taken away, and that his conduct was very reprehensible. If constables were permitted to use this power to blacken a man’s character in that way no one would he safe. In the present case had not Mr. Dngard been supported by counsel, who sifted the evidence given by Lyster, he would probably have lost his license.

'Die Resident Magistrate said lie lied strong doubts whether the evidence of the prosecution would bear out a case of perjury, for two reasons. In the first place, the administering of the oath was not clearly proved, and secondly, he thought it was extremely doubtful whether the statement made by Lyster was material to the case. After hearing the evidence called for the defence, however, he had no hesitation in dismissing the case. The affair appeared to have been a mere trivial one, and it was certainly reprehensible of Lyster to have made the statement which he did at the Hutt Licensing Court with a view to influence the Bench against granting the license. He should dismiss the case.

Mr. Buckley asked for a certificate of dis missal.

His Worship said he would hear the application next day, when Mr. Buckley could, if he chose, bring proof that the magistrate iiad jurisdiction to that extent, as he believed himself that certificates of dismissal were only granted in summary cases. The Court then adjourned.