RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5335, 3 May 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thursday, May 2. (Before J. C. Crawford, Esq., 8.M.) DRUNKENNESS. .T. Huntley, who said he had had too much champagne the afternoon before, was fined 55., or 24 hours’ imprisonment, for drunkenness. VAGRANCY. Thomas Francis, an old man 60 years of age, was sent to gaol for one month for vagrancy. ASSAULT.

James Spoor was charged by Ann Spoor with assaulting her on the 22nd April. Mr. Chapman appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Travers for the defendant.

Complainant deposed that on the day in question she was out walking with a man named Wilson. They met her husband (J. Spoor), and tried to avoid him. He (the husband and defendant) made a rush at her, and shoved her against a shop window close to Allen’s chemist’s shop. He then caught hold of her by the collar and dragged her a considerable distance, using disgusting language. He next slapped her in the face, when she struck him with her umbrella.

H. Wilson gave corroborative evidence. There was a cross action, in which the evidence was somewhat conflicting. His Worship bound defendant over to keep the peace for three months, himself in £lO and two sureties of £lO each. The second case was dismissed. THE POISONING CASH.

William O’Connor was charged, on remand, with administering to William Light a quantity of strychnine, with intent to murder the said William Light. Mr. Buckley prosecuted, and Mr. Gordon Allan defended the prisoner. William Light, proprietor of Barrett’s Hotel, Wellington, deposed as follows : I have, known the prisoner for three weeks. During this time he was staying at my hotel. I saw him oh Sunday last in my bar parlor at twenty minutes to eleven o’clock at night. There was another man named Pye also in the parlor. The bar communicates with the bar parlor by a door. I took charge of the bar at twenty minutes to eleven o’clock, and at eleven o'clock went into the bar parlor. Pye and the prisoner were still there. Previous to this I had constantly gone backwards and forwards to the bar, but did not speak to Pye or prisoner. Previous to this I started washing up the glasses and putting things straight. At eleven o’clock I told Pye and prisoner that I wanted to shut up. Pye said “ All right, father ; I won’t keep you up.” He then shook hands with me, said good-night, and left. He was not a lodger. He went out through the bar. The prisoner remained in the room. Pripr to my going into the room and telling them it was eleven o’clock they were both sitting on chairs. Pye went out through the bar, as the side door was looked. After Pye left I went on with my work. After a little while prisoner said “Mr. Light.” I went into the parlor and found him sitting in the same chair that he was in at first. He said “ Oh, Mr. Light, I shall be leaving you to-morrow.. It’s a week, and I had better pay you.” He gave me two notes, and I gave him back his change. I asked him if he was going by the five o’clock coach in the morning, as there were several others in the house going at that time. He replied that ho was not. When he picked up his change I said we had better have a parting drink. He said “ All right.” I asked him what he would have, and he said Irish whisky. I said I shall have a drop of Scotch. • I then poured out the drinks. I took the whisky from the usual place. The liquor was in decanters. I brought the whisky into the room in tumblers. The tumblers were taken from a special place kept for the purpose under the bar. This is were I kept the clean glasses only. They were standing on mats upside down. I took hold of the glasses with one hand and held them up to the light. -They wore clean and dry. I then poured the whisky into them. I had to hold them up to the light to see how much whisky I put in them. I then took the two whiskys into the bar parlor, and laid one glass in front of the prisoner, and placed the other on the table close to where I was going to sit down myself. While I was in the act of putting down the - glasses one of the'bells rang from upstairs. I went up stairs through the bar door, the side door being still looked. The prisoner was left alone in the room with the two glasses. I was, absent upstairs about a minute, and was absent about two minutes when I took the drinks up stairs. I then returned ■to the room in which the prisoner was sitting. He was in the same chair as when I last saw him. I then pulled a chair up to where my drink was. I was just going to drink it, when I noticed something white in the glass on the edge to the bottom. It had the appearance of white powder. There was no one in the room at this time but the prisoner and myself. I took up tlie glass with my left hand, held it up and looked at it, and then changed it into my right hand. I said, “ Good God what is this.” I spoke to prisoner and said, “ What is this ? whatever does this mean ?” Prisoner said, “ I suppose you have got a dirty glass.” There was nothing in the glass when I took it into the room except whisky. I put my finger inside of the dry portion of the glass, and then put my finger to my tongue and said “ 0 lor’, how beastly it tastes.” I then took it out to the bar. During this time prisoner said, “ Here's luck,” and drank his whisky off. I put my glass of whisky on a bottom shelf in the bar, and went back to the parlor rubbing my tongue. Prisoner was then getting up from the chair. He pushed by me, unlocked the door, and said “Good night” and went upstairs. I looked the door immediately. I then had another look at the glass, and turned on 1 the gas at the end of the bar, and saw some ’ crystals on the bottom of the glass. There were also one or two crystals on the dry portion of the glass. What I saw on the side of the glass looked like powder. I then took the glass into my room, got a piece of paper, and took a pencil out of my pocket and wrote a memorandum.

Mr. Buckley wished to produce this written document, but Mr. - Gordon Allan objected. Mr. Buckley did not press for the production of the paper. Examination continued : I wrote down on the paper what took- place, put it on a shelf, and then placed the glass on it. In front of the glass I placed a lot of cigar boxes. I then went round the bottom of the house to see if everything was right. I next went to the table from which the glasses were taken, and examined it for the purpose of finding whether there was any powder about, but found nothing. I searched the floor on my hands and knees, and on the hearthrug, where the prisoner’s chair was standing, I saw a few crystals resembling those I saw in the glass. I tried to pick them up, but felt rather nervous. I tried to pick them up with the small blade of my pocket-knife, but could not do it. The next morning I found the glass in the same place as where I left it. I than went out for the. purpose of seeing Mr. Fife, chemist, but I met him in the street, and we both came on to my house. He saw the glass. I afterwards gave it to Sergeant Price, in presence of Sergeant Smith. I never thought any more of the; hearthrug until Tuesday, when Ser- : goant Smith came and rolled it up. This was the same rug that prisoner’s chair was standing on. After the prisoner had gone upstairs to bed on Sunday evening ho came down again

and knocked at the bar door. I was still in the bar counting my money. I said, “ Who's there ?" Prisoner answered, “ It’s me." He said,“ I want some brandy." I then opened the bar,.;and prisoner said, “Give me some brandy and lemonade to take upstairs," and remarked that he thought he had been drinking too much. Prisoner bad a strange appearance. He looked ghastly. When I served him with the whisky he was not drunk, neither did he look ghastly, but on the contrary was laughing and talking. When he knocked at the' bar door I felt frightened, and was very nearly not opening the bar ; but afterwards “ I plucked up," and opened it. Prisoner took the drink to his bedroom. Directly he had gone I locked the bar and went round to look at prisoner’s window. He put his light out in about ten minutes. I saw prisoner between 10 and 11 o’clock next morning. He' ‘ came to the bar and asked for a glass of ale, which I gave him. I never spoke to- him when I was pouring out the ale, because there was another man standing close to him; Prisoner said to me, “If any letters come for me direct them to Patea." I said to him, “ I believe you will have to answer some questions relating to last night.” At this stage Mr. Buckley asked for a remand for eight days. Mr. Allan said he would not oppose an adjournment, provided Mr. Buckley would be prepared to finish the case at that time. The witness was placed in the box again, and stated that he had been selling the whisky to his customers from the same decanters as those which he used on Sunday night. Mr. Allan asked for bail.

Mr, Buckley said that iu a case of this sort the bail should be very substantial; in fact he thought in cases of murder or attempted murder it was not usual to grant bail at all. His Worship said if he granted bail the amount would be so large that the prisoner could not obtain the sureties. The prisoner would be remanded until next Thursday.

SLY-GEOG SELLING. John Carroll was summoned for selling to J. Briggs at Bimutaka, on the 7th April last, two bottles of rum, contrary to the Licensing Ordinance.

Mr.-Ollivier appeared for the defendant. The first witness called was Eliza Briggs, who deposed that she was the wife of David Briggs. She remembered Sunday, 7th April. There was a man named William Wiggins at her house. He sent 'witness* son to Carroll’s for two bottles, of rum, and gave him four half-crowns to buy it with. On his return the bottle was “ cracked." It contained rum.

By Mr. Ollivier : She was tried for selling grog. She knew the taste of rum. She might have given her son spirits when he had been unwell. He is eleven years old. John Briggs, son of the last witness, said that he had been sent to buy two bottle rum from Carroll, which he paid for. He gave Ss. for the first and 7s. 6d. for the second.

His Worship thought the case was clearly proved, and fined defendant £3O. His Worship remarked that. he made the fjne £3O because that was the price of a publican’s license.

Mr, Ollivier asked leave to stay proceedings, as he would give notice of appeal. He called his-Worship’a attention to the wording of the summons, pointing out that it should have read “ permitting to sell" instead “of selling.” After some few other remarks, his Worship allowed the £3O to be deposited in Court until Mr. Ollivier appealed.

CIVIL OASES. Jameson Bros. v. S. Cook.—Claim £l4 2s. 5d., judgment summons. An order was made for the payment of the debt in one month.

Smith v. J. A. Williams.—Claim, £6 18s. lid., goods supplied. Judgment for plaintiff by default for the amount claimed, with costs.

Same v. E. Short.—Claim, £4 4s._ Bd. Judgment by default for the amount claimed and, costs.

Benton v. Sheean.—Claim, £2 7s. 6d., for work done. Judgment for plaintiff by default, with costs. Haybiddle v. Ebuer and Co.—Claim, £22 ss. Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs.

Huntley v, Mantell.—Claim £6, for work done. Mr. Travers appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Chapman for the defendant. There was also a cross action, in which the defendant claimed £SO as damages through Huntley not completing certain work. Huntley, the plaintiff in the first case, stated that he was a scenic artist and mechanist. He also acted occasionally. He was engaged by E. W. Cary, manager for Mr. Oakes, who was manager ,for the Mantells, to do certain stage work at St. George’s Hall. He considered himself a weekly servant, and had never had an engagement, though he wished for one. The work that he did was not ordinary carpenters’ work; there were only two men in the town who could do it. Several witnesses were examined. J. Oakes, manager for Mantells, said that the work done by Huntley was of no use. It would not work. He made some little figures to work in connection with a panorama ; the arrangement was supposed to work by turning a handle, similar to a mangle, but the figures would not work. He considered the company lost a lot of money by Huntley not carrying out his contract.

His Worship said in the first case judgment would be for the defendant In the second case he considered that Huntley was under an engagement to Oakes to do certain stage work, which was not done.

Mr. Chapman hero remarked that he did not press for heavy damages. His Worship then assessed them at 10s, and oostsA vv; •'. : ■