THE HORSEWHIPPING CASE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5170, 17 October 1877, Page 2

THE HORSEWHIPPING CASE.

In the Resident Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning the horsewhipping case of Hislop v. Maokay was called oh. Mr. Stout appeared for Mr. Hislop,. the prosecutor, and Dr. Duller for Mr. Maekay, the defendant. Dr. Duller applied for the adjournment of the case until this morning at -11 o’clock, as material witnesses were required for the defence. Owing to the case not being placed in hia hands until after office hours of the evening previous, no time had been allowed for issuing subpoenas for the attendance of the witnesses required. Mr. Stout demurred to the adjournment being granted. It would, he said, be a personal inconvenience to himself tor the case to be postponed, as he had to attend a select committee of the House next morning. Mr. Stout stated, as he did not wish it to be said, “ when Mr. Maekay would interview his newspaper friends,” that the postponement would not “be consented to, he (Mr. Stout) would therefore agree to the adjournment. Defore leaving the Court Dr. Duller informed the Dench that his client was perfectly willing to enter into recognisances for his appearance at the required time. The Dench accepted Mr. Mackay’s personal surety of £2O for his appearance this morning.