RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Patea Mail, Volume II, Issue 121, 7 June 1876, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tuesday, Juxk 6. (Before Major Turner, R.M. and H. S. Peacock Esq., J.P.) ASSAULT. ; James and Martin Bulger were charged with having, on the 6th of May last, violently assaulted Charles Thomas at Wairoa. Mr Fitzherbeit appeared for complainant. The defendants did not appear, but as it was proved, that they had been duly summoned, the case was heard in their absence. Charles Thomas stated as follows :—On the night of the 6th of May last, I saw defendants at the Waverly hotel. Martin Bulger knocked an old man down and James kicked him. I protested against this, and shortly afterwards started home., I saw the defendants on the road. Martin had.struck me before at Christmas, but I had taken no steps about it. He came up to me and asked me to think no more about it, and I said that! had not done so, as it was Christmas time, and he - was the worse for liquor at the time. After going a little further Martin seized the bridle of my horse and attempted to break the reins, after which, they pulled me off my horse, struck and kicked me repeatedly,

and as\£ast as I attempted to get-on my horse, they pulled me off, and repeated the beating and kicking, and I still feel the. effects of my ill usage. . , / Edward Reynolds fully corroborated the evidence of complainant, and said that defendants wore occupied, in maltreating Thomas for fully half an .hour. The defendants wore sawyers, who had come out from the old country about 18 months’ ago. The assault was entirely unprovoked. The Bench inflicted a fine of £5 on each of the defendants, with £8 2s 2d costs, in default two mouths imprisonment. At the request of Mr- Fitzherbert, who stated that his client had been threatened by defendants, the Bench agreed to bind the defendants to keep the peace. •. ; DEBT CASKS. ' Thomas v. J. Bulger.—To recover £2, for whip- and money lent. Verdict for amount claimed and costs. ; S. Tapi in v. Margaret Casey.—A judgment summons for £C 19s. A letter was read from her, stating that she was a domestic servant, and had not at present the means of payment. She therefore prayed for time. The plaintiff said that the debt had been owing between three .and four years, and no attempt had been made to pay during that time. Ordered to pay within a "month or a warrant to issue. Taplin v. Cummins. —To recover £8 11s 2d, goods supplied. Verdict for amount claimed. The Court then adjourned till 2 o’clock, as the Licensing Court had to be held at noon. ■ • • . ■ At 2 o’clock the following business was disposed of. ' Marshall v. Williams Mr Hammerton for plaintiff, Mr Fitzberbert'for defendant. This was a claim for work, and labour in connection with a, thrashing machine, but as it appeared that defendant was only one of a company, plaintiff was non-suited. Bassett v. Rhodes.—Mr Adams for plaintiff, Mr Fitzherbert for the defence. An action to recover £l4, the value of a horse alleged to have been sold b} T defendant, but the property of plaintiff. The latter’s case broke down utterly, it being proved that the. horse sold, and the one claimed by plaintiff, were totally different animals. Verdict for the defendant with £2 5s costs. Cowern v. Eason Bros, to recover £7 8s 2d, rates, alleged to be due, was postponed till this day. The Court then adjourned.