RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.-TOLOGA BAY.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1186, 27 October 1882, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.-TOLOGA BAY.

October 24th. [Before Capt. Preece, Esq., R.M., — Monro Esq. s acting as Interpreter.] Several cases of drunkenness were diposed of, Mr Turton having appeared for one of the accused. ALLEGED BREACH OF THE LICENSING ACT. Henry Trimmer was charged with two several cases of permitting dancing on his licensed premises, the Ferry Hotel, Tologa Bay. Mr W. L. Lees appeared for the defendant. These were informations charging with

broaches cf the Licensing Act, 1881, Cl. 128, which states that no open or general dancing should be hold without a permit signed by two or more of the Licensing Committee of the district. In this case tne defence was that on both occasions, June 21 and Sept. 13, special written permits were granted, which were handed in on the part of the defendant. In the first case the permit was signed by Andrew Reeves, Esq., J.P., and Henry Williams: while in the second instance the signatures Wore those of Mr J. Gannon, the Chairman, and Stewart R. Stewart, Esq, one of the members. In the first case Mr Reeves. J. P<i was called, and said he had been given to understand that the dancing was to be in an outbuilding, and not on the licensed promises, but no such restriction was stated in the permit, of which tho Committee, though provided with a clerk, seems to have kept no copy. Mr Rees showed that the information was faulty in law, and did not state any breach of the Act as Hgidnst the defendant. His client had obtained the requisite permission, which took the dancing on the two occasions charged out of tho pWD gibility of being breaches of tho Act. His Worship seemed, after a reference to the Act, to consider that there was no breach of law, and asked the prosecutor (Constable Stagpoole) whether he would proceed to prove tho cibc ? M, Stagpoolo, being sworn, stated that he had repeatedly v arned Mr Trimmer that he

was not allowed to have dancing on his promises, aud that ho persisted in doing so. Tho decision of the Court was that the cases bp both dismissed, as the defendant was clearly within the Act in permitting these two persons in ouch case to hold a dancing party on bis licensed premises. The only remark Hia Worship felt called on to make was that the Licensing Commissioners should in future see that they had some guarantee that th© persons applying would conduct the dance. In oxi a ol the cases one of the persons had already been fined for drunkeimflga on the day of the dance ; but that was a contingency that might happen to any publican, and in this case Mr Trimmer had, it seems done all he could to get rid of the person who had been overtaken by drink by sending him home, away from the company of the respectable ladies and gentlemen who were enjoying a measure of rational enjoyment on the evenings in question. Mr Trimmer was further charged with permitting the person alluded to above to be drunk on his premises. Three several witnesses who were present at the dance deposed that Mr Trimmer had I repeatedly urged the obnoxious person to go home ; that indeed that person had been imbibing all the afternoon, and came tipsy to the Ferry Hotel in the evening, but was conveyed home, out of the way of the respectable parties who were enjoying their evening's relaxation. This case also was dismissed by the Court. ALLEGED MAORI RIOTING AT TOKOMARV.

The next case called was A. C. Arthur against Hirini Tawhara and six others, for four charges each of indictable offences. 1. Rioting; 2. Malicious injury; 3. Forcible entry under common law ; and 4. Forcible entry under Statute law. The particulars of this information have already appeared in the Standard, and are as follows :— The run at Tokomaru is let to A. U. Arthur as a sheep run. Several of the joint proprietors have not signed the lease and object to Mr Arthur’s occupancy. These have taken the law into their own hands with a view of disgusting Mr Arthur with his lease. . All the defendants appeared with the single exception of Hirini Tawhara, on whoso behalf the Court had received a letter, and Mr Rees, as their counsel, made an application that he should be excused on the ground of illhealth. The Court, in the absence of a- medical certificate, still held that tho application for excuse should not be granted, Mr Nolan, for the prosecutor, proposed that the six persons appearing should be charged, the case against Tawhara being held over without prejudice. Mr Nolan stated that Mr Arthur was not inclined to proceed to extremities while all admitted that in no case was it admissible to take the law into one’s own hands, still every allowance was to be made on account of the ignorance of the accused, He stated emphatically that the accused were not the principal offenders, but that they m orc set on to do what they wore charged with doing, at the instigation of their “respected” Chief Henare Potae, who was equally if not more to blame than the accused. Seeing therefore that tho Natives had appeared at the bar, he would crave perndssion to withdraw the Informations. Mr Rees, for ucccused, said that tho Courts of Law were ever open for tho redress of grievances, ami that ho had always urged upon any Natives who earno to consult him professionally, that they nut think of taking the law into their own hands, no matter to what extent they might be provoked. , The Court allowed the prosecutions to be withdrawn. These were, however; four very serious offences, and while the Court was willing to permit the withdrawal, at the same time they must not take the law. into their own hands. They must beware in future lest they permit their passions to overcome their judgments. The Resident Magistrate said he hoped he should not have another case of this wurt brought before him on the coast. He was pleased to see that the prohad ih«wn a vairy good

I able spirit. Without at all presuming to blame the accused (for no facts had been brought out in evidence) he must say that if the information were proved and convictions were recorded, very long terms of imprisonment would have been adjudged. He thought that the interest of justice would be met by allowing all the cases to bo withdrawn. Mr Rees stated that as regards Henare Potae he would say that that chief had considered it his duty to protect his tribe, but that it was only as such and not on any personal account or self-interest that he had been connected with the alleged proceedings. He did not for a moment admit that any of the indictable charges in the informations had been committed. The Court further added—The accused have perhaps been prompted by some advice, but it is well that they must know that no one can plead as a justification of a breach of the law that they were advised to do it.

Cases wirhdrawn by consent of the Court. This decision leaves the question at issue still open. That question is the right of Mr Arthur to occupy the run at Tokomaru. The feeling is general, however, amongst both rates that Mr Arthur has done an extremely graceful act. At the same time the Maoris were well prepared with any amount of evidence, the quality of which your correspondent may (from out of Court information) safely allege was composed of hard swearing without compunction.

SURETIES OF THE PEACE. Hori Waiti, of Tokomaru, one of the persons charged with the indictable offence, was then charged by George Boyd, station manager for Mr Arthur, with threatening to cut his (Boyd’s) throat. Mr Nolan appeared .or plaintiti, and Mr Rees for defendant. Mr Nolan asked that the defendant might be bound over in good sureties to keep the peace. George Boyd, of Tokomaru, sworn, deposed : On the 18th September I saw defendant with others in a whare. After the meeting the summonses were served. He threatened to kill mo and lot the Government hang him afterwards. He drew his finger across his throat in this manner (which witness showed). lam quite certain that he threatened to kill me. He spoke in Maori, but I am quite sure from tho purport that he threatened to kill me. I wish him bound over to keep the peace, Cross-examined by Mr Rees—My reason is that he docs not bear a good character. This is the only occasion on which ho has threatened me. This is no personal matter, but wholly on account of my being in the service of Mr Arthur, and having to do with tho service of tho summonses. I have no personal quarrel with tho defendant. The summonses in the indictable oases which have been withdrawn, wore served by one or both of Constables Stagpoole and Walsh. Nothing has taken place except on this occasion. I tried to stop tho Natives on the occasion of their riotous conduct, and was the chief cause of getting up the case against them. Alexander Creighton Arthur (Hilled i I reside at Poverty Bay, and have a Tokomaru, I was at Tokomaru on the 18th September, and heard what passed. Hori Whaiti was oqc of the parties summoned. Ho got very indignant, and said “I'll cut your throat (suiting the action to the word) even if the white man should hang mu for it.” CrOBB-examined by Mr Roes : I cannot quote tho Maori words. I understand enough Maori to know the full purport of what was said. I. compared what was said with Mr John Brooking, licensed interpreter, who was present inion tko occasion. Constable Walsh called and sworn : I was at Tokomaru on the 18th September. I saw Hori Waiti there. He said he would out Boyd's throat if ho Were hung next day. He aaid that to Boy. .. _ , T , Cross-examined by Mr Rees—Ho spoke partly in English, I cannot say what were the exact words, either In Maori or English. He used the gesture. He apologised afterwards to the police in Boyd’s presence. Mr Nolan stated that this closed the ease. Mr Brooking was not able to come. He asked for sureties of the case to prevent a recurrence of such behaviour. Mr Rees stated that he did not object to defendant being bound over, as there were words of violence used. But the occasion was irritating a dispute about land, and he begged to state that the ends of justice would be served if defendant were bound over for 3or 6 months on his own security. There was no continuous threatening and there is no reason to fear that the threat will be carried out. Without presuming, he desired to suggest that defendant’s own bond would be sufficient to meet this case. Mr Nolan objected to such a mild view being taken of this very serious offence. What his learned friend applied for would amount to nothing and mean virtually “As you were.” The Court ordered defendant himself to be bound surety in £lOO for six months, one ' other surety in £5O, to keep the peace towards Henry Boyd and all Her Majesty s subjects. ' Mr Rees applied if Henare Potae was to be received as a surety. The Court and Mr Nolan objected to this, as just having been a bankrupt. The Court wishes for an European security. Allowed till 3 o’clock to-day, till which time he will be allowed to go at large. Also, • defendant to pay cost of Court, 12s, and counsel's fee, one guinea, for the payment of ' which Mr Rees became bound. 1 After a dinner adjournment for one hour, ' numerous civil cases were gone on with, but I shall not further tax your space. ' The Court will probably sit all to-morrow ' (Wednesday), and perhaps on part of the ' following day.