S.M. COURT.

Otaki Mail, Volume XXVIII, 3 September 1920, Page 2

S.M. COURT.

OTAKI—THURSDAY. (Before Messrs 11. Freeman and F. Bennett, J 's.P.) Assault on a Cliinanian. Robert Flu toy (Mr At more) was charged on the information of Buc See Kong (Mr Stave-ley) with assault. Mr Atrnore. in putting in a plea ot guilty, asked for leniency, pointing out that through the Chinaman’s act Flutev’s horse had shied ami in consequence the Celestial was struck. Defendant, who had a tine war record, was well respeetod and industrious, and was now*sorry for his act. Constable Satherley said accused, when first taxed with the charge, denied it. but later admitted the offence. As a result of the blow the Chinaman, who was t)S years of age, was badly injured on the forehead. Complainant (through Mr T. A. King, interpreter) stated lie was sitting quietly on.,flic side of the road when the accused, without provocation. struck him with a whip across the face. s Mr Stnveley pointed out. that, although Celestials were not favoured by many, they were a law-abiding rate, and should not be the subject of such attacks. It was hard to think that a young man would strike such a decrepit old man. A line of ‘_’os. costs £1 tis, was indieted. Charge of Theft. Horace Worboys was charged with the theft of it ease of kerosene, value 275, the property of the Railway Department. Constable tSatherley stated defend ant was on a train journeying from I’aeknkariki to Fa ra pa ran mu, and when opposite his residence at tin-

latter place threw- the case off. The, guard noticed the incident and reported the accused. The latter admitted the offence, stating the act was done on the spur of the moment. The Department had written asking for a severe penalty, as it wished to cope with lie- large amount of thieving that was going on. The father of tin- accused stated tin- act was unpremeditated, anil that ]ji s son ws.s not conscious ol ulnit he was doing till the case smashed. The accused was subject to impulses, ami suffered acutely as tit- result of his ari. since committing the offence he had made all amends. His previous character had been of the best. The Bench said petty thieving would have to be stopped, but as the act was unpremeditated they would impose a light penalty, viz., I-, the kerosene, or its value, to be returned. More Petty Thieving. dames Kenwiek and James Marino were charged with the theft of ben •zinc from the Te Boro railway station. The accused elected summary trial, and pleaded guilty. Constable Satherley considered th‘- ~ m riiois one. ami stated that, tht benzine had been deliberately stolen and made use of. the empty cases being thrown away. Mr stavclev. who appeared for the accused, stated Uenwiek hail pro niised to take some hookey players to ’Levin, but despite endeavours to j secure benzine he found himself un abb- to fulfil his contract, Having no desire to disappoint the players he yielded to temptation when he saw the benzine, seized it with the intention of replacing it before his act was not iced. The Bench considered the net deliberate. and fined each defendant £•". and ordered that the value of the boazinc- <r>6*) hi; ii I >f j psi i<l. Claim for Money Lent. George Gallagher claimed from H. J. •StiiveU v the .-urn of £lO, alleged to 0--)noney lent. Gallagher stated that he lent to Mr Staveley £2O on a p.n., and an i.o.u. and of the a mount only £lo had I ten repaid. The defence was: that only £lO had been borrowed on an 1.0. u., and had been paid later. Defendant, stated that when he paid the money he asked Gallagher for the note, bu’ received an answer that it was at horn*and that he would band it over later. He knew plaintiff was a muddler in financial affairs, arid in consequence had the amount borrowed entered in ■> book with Gallagher's signature opposite. He had trusted the plaintiff, and still believed that he was suing under a misapprehension. The Beach gave judgment for plain tiff for the amount claimed, with costs. Civil Easiness. .1. W. Skelley (Mr Atrnore) v. W. H Ransom, clatn: £0 30*. -lodgment by default, costs 25s fid. Judgment by default was also give;. ; in -the following eases:—Howard Andrew v. Philip Heremi, claim £7 12* &d, cost# 6d; same Albert Royal, claim £7 30# 3d, costs 35s Od; same v, Charles Adams, claim £7 12# Id, cost* 37* Od. JudgroetT was also given in the following cases. in which the Town Board claimed for overdue rate#, costs being given ir: each ease:—-v. Hire. Parata. claim £2 2s 74; v. G. F. Murray, claim £T 30r sd; v. Bam Cook, chairs £4 14s ”'I; v. Aaguit Bishop, claim £2 Hi Sd; ’• Rki and Lets Cootes, claim £3 3.7 e; v. Mr* VFa ka X&iki, eiattc £0 10aj'-v. Mr* Roach, claim £3O 3* 8d; v, C'tHtn Hapita. claim £3 0s lid: xr. Jftctt Hapeta. claim £ll 3*s 0d; v. Baik* Takarore. «laim £l4 15s 74; v. Mr* J. Chase, claim £1 t*i Id.