RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume III, Issue 430, 22 November 1876, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Gisborne, Tuesday, November 21, 1876. (Before W. K. Nesbitt, Esq., R.M.) Breach of Impounding Act.—Hirini Tipari and Te Kauri were charged with having broken the pound at Karawa and liberated certain animals therefrom. Messrs Wilson and Rogan for the prosecution, Mr Whitaker for the defence. J. E. Greene sworn, deposed: lam poundkeeper at Karawa. I was not present, at the time of the alleged breach. Sergt. Joyce sworn, deposed to having seen accused cut down the wire and posts of the Pound Yard ; they took the posts out. of the ground. A mare and foal were in at the time, and got at large iu consequence. Cross-examined by Mr Whitaker : There were other natives present at the time. They took no part in the matter. Chas. Wilkie sworn, corroborated previous witness. For the Defence : Hirini Tipari sworn, deposed that the ground on which the pound stood was his own property, and that he never gave any person authority to proclaim it a pound.

Cross-examined by Mr Wilson : It forms part of the Okirau block. lam one of 52 owners of the block. Paora Kati : I am an owner of the Okirau block ; I never consented to the erection of the pound. I was told that if Sir George Grey’s government come to the ground, the pound would too. Witness further said that the Government sent him word to knock down the pound.

Mr Whitaker contended that there was no authority in the Superintendent to proclaim the pound, and the defendants had a perfect right to pull it down if it was erected without their permission.

Mr Wilson differed. It was the dnty of the Bench to assume that everything had been legally done, and to deal with the matter in his jurisdiction. Judgment deferred till to-morrow, (this) morning. Cooper v. Read. —Judgment was delivered in this case for plaintiff £34 14s 9d, exclusive of £7 12s paid into court.

Tucker v. Read. —This was an information laid under the 4th section of the Vagrant Act, against the defendant for having used insulting and abusive language in the public streets. Mr Wilson, who appeared for the accused, took objection to the information being incomplete. No hour was mentioned, and no person’s name recorded, to whom, or iu whose presence, the alleged language was used. Mr Tucker thought this unnecessary since it was an offence uuder the Act to make use of such language at all. Mr Wilson, in the course of his explanation, said that if no person was present it was not so. If he (Mr Wilson) came into’the streets at midnight and made use of the most insulting language, and no person about, it was no offence.

The Bench decided that the information should be amended, and the hearing fixed for next Tuesday. Warren v. R. Kelly.—Claim, £l2 9s 9d. Adjourned for 5 weeks. (Left Sitting.)