Patea R.M. Court.

Patea Mail, 7 May 1881, Page 3

Patea R.M. Court.

Friday, before Dr Croft and Mr H. F. Christie, J.P.’s. ASSAULT CASKS. George White had been summoned for assaulting Mrs Mercer. Defendant is a brickrnaker near Patea, and both parties are advanced in years. Defendant had also summoned John Mercer, son of complainant, for assault. Mary Arm Mercer deposed ; On Thursday the 28th April, I went across the river with my son’s tea. I went on to the corner of Mr White’s land. I was only speaking to Mr Keys about his brother who was hurt. White came behind, caught me by the two shoulders and pushed and kicked me across his ground to the road. He also struck me on the face. He used most abusive language. He was drunk, but knew me. While stooping to pick up my hat he kicked me several times. His wife was standing at her door, and he made her go in. I told her not to go in to be beaten by him. I threw a stick into the house back-handed, and ho then pulled his wife out and said “ See what you have done at rny wife.” I believe he did it himself. I afterwards beard Mrs White screaming in the house, Mrs White came last Tuesday and offered me £3 10s to settle the case. I did not accept it, but came to Court, and the case was adjourned. Last Tuesday, after seeing Mr Hamerton at the Court, White said he would willingly pay £4. Mrs White had several marks on her face, and had no clothing except a waterproof, and her feet were bare. Cross-examined : White did not ask me to leave his ground. John Keys, brickrnaker for Mr White, said : White asked Mrs Mercer to go off the ground. She said she would go when she was ready. He said she had made enough disturbance between him and his wife, and he got her by one arm and led her quietly out of the gate. She was singing out to Mrs White to come out of the house and go home with her. Mrs White came out, and he led her back in the house. I saw Mrs Mercer throw a billet of wood, which struck Mrs White on the forehead. I saw it hit her when she was looking out at the door. Cross-examined : I did not see him kick her at all. She began blackguarding. Edward Mercer, husband of complainant, said : My wife was bruised on her arms, and she had marks of kicks.

George White, defendant, said : Mrs fiercer came on my ground because she jas tried to separate myself and wife for two years. It is patent to all Patca that she has done so. I put hei out of the gate with as gentle force as a man could use to a woman. Kicking is the last thing I should think of. She went partly up the road, came back to my house, and knocked at the door. I opened the door, and she threw a billet of wood in, which missed me but hit my wife on the forehead. She went away. I call my God to witness that I used no more force to put her oft’ than the law allows me.

Cross-examined ; Emphatically 1 did not kick her. M3 7 wife did not scream. I did offer to pay £4, and would sooner have paid any money 7 than have law. I would sooner pay Mr Harnerton £4 than have his tongue. Mr Harnerton contended that Mrs Mercer was legally justified in throwing a stick at White after he had assaulted her. If no one touched her but White, how did she get bruised ? He had also offered vo compromise by payment. The Bench dismissed the case. John Mercer was then charged with assaulting and heating Mr White, on the same day after the other fracas. Geo. White said : I was nursing a child in my 7 hou-e when I was seized by the hair and struck by Mercer. He said “ You kicked my mother.” The child fell to the floor. Another man came in and took him off me. My face is marked. Mr Harnerton, for the defendant, admitted that Mercer struck White, but said the provocation justified him. Mr Adams, for plaintiff, said there was a witness who saw the assault. The Bench fined the defendant 10s and costs for taking the law into his own

hands. Solicitor’s fee of one guinea was allowed, making the costs 28s. civil cases. W. Treeby v. Patterson. This was a claim for £l6 3s 6d, balance for erecting cottages. The defendant said be bad paid the amount to Mr Dale who supplied timber and iron. Troeby put in a contract showing the amount claimed for was included in the contract price. Patterson, defendant, said the plaintiff agreed to build two cottages for £lO7, and defendant was to find material. Defendant gave Mr Dale an order on plaintiff to pay for material supplied. Mr Dale stated that the iron in dispute had been supplied to Treeby 7 for another contract, but was used by consent for these cottages. Treeby was the person who asked to have the iron transferred to the cottages. Treeby 7 ’s contention was that he was dealing with Patterson, not with Dale. Bench dismissed the case, and advised a mutual settlement. PLOUGH V . MUNDELL. This was a claim by a seaman on the ketch Forest Queen for one month’s wages. Had shipped at Wellington at £5 a month. Was in Wellington harbor six day r s, and on reaching Patea was told to clear out. The captain refused payment but said ho would pay 7 boy’s wages. He refused to render an account. Had been a seaman 12 years and produced certificcte. Tho Defendant, captain of the ketch, said the plaintiff worked fairly at Wellington, but after that he became quite unmanageable and would not work. At Patea tho captain was asked to discharge him, and the captain said ho would if he could get another man. The plaintiff is the laziest man he over knew. He used to come down at all hours of night, waking others up to get something to eat. He was a gourmandiser. Would not have turned him off if he had done anything at all. It is tho custom in small vessels to turn a man out at any time. Did not engage him for any term, but at £5 per month. The mate said ho had never seen such a lazy man on a vessel. Tho plaintiff went on shore five times on the day he was discharged. Tho captain said he offered to pay ordinary seaman’s wages, but the plaintiff wanted paid at the rate of an able seaman. Considered lie was not worth that rate. The Bench decided that the plaintiff should have been offered his wages for the 16 days he was on board, at tho rate per month. Judgment for that amount with costs. POTTO V WOOD. A. Wood was sued for goods sold and delivered by plaintiff, a saddler. Defendant did not appear. Judgment for £1 Os 6d and costs.