R. M. COURT, GISBORNE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 113, 23 April 1884, Page 2

R. M. COURT, GISBORNE.

(Before J. Booth, Esq., R.M.) TUESDAY. MORSE V. BERESFORD. Claim £6 for damages, for the loss of a horse. The plaintiff deposed he had a horse, and left it at the defendant’s hotel, on the lOtli instant. Defendant received the horse and fed it. Had paid for the feed. Had not had the horse since the day it was left there. Saw it on Saturday. Had demanded the horse from defendant, who told him to go and look for it. Valued the horse at £6. To Mr. Nolan—Bought the horse from Mr. Currie, and had had it about twelve months. Had dinner at defendant’s on the 12th. Saw the horse there, in the stable. Asked one of the servants to tether the horse out, and afterwards asked defendant. Did not know whether the horse was tethered out. Was not at the hotel between o/.e o’clock in the day and twelve o’clock at night. Did not go into defendant’s for a drink that afternoon. Was positive of that. Did not see defendant’s servant after ten, Saw him with reference to the horse on Sunday morning. Expect the horse was tethered out every day, On Sunday morning he asked where his horse was, and Frank, the servant, said he did not know. Asked Silk, another servant, where it was, and he said he thought it was tethered out. They went to look for it and could not find it. The defendant did not look for the horse, but told him to do so. F. Kenna knew plaintiff. Remembered the Saturday in question. Met plaintiff about two o’clock. Was with him the whole afternoon, and till between seven and eight o’clock in the evening. He had not time to go to the Settlers. Did not know the circus chaps, but were with them. J. Grindle remembered the day in question, and was with defendant from eight till ten o’clock that night. Never left any part of the time. This was the case for the plaintiff, Mr. Nolan said that if that was all the plaintiff’s evidence he submitted that they should have a judgment, as the plaintiff had given instructions that the horse should be tethered out. To support his argument he quoted authority, and which clearly bore him out. Mr Brassey said Mr Nolan's argument was incomprehensible to him. It did not follow that because the plaintiff gave instructions to have the horse tethered out, that he was holding himself responsible for the safety of it. After further argument, His Worship decided in favor of the defendant, for whom judgment was given. Mr Brassey afterwards said he would take a non-suit. Non-suited accordingly. Costs of court, £2 ss.

THIS DAY. ATTEMPTED SUICIDE. Chas. King was again brought up, charged with attempted suicide. Mr. Brassey appeared for the accused. E. P. Joyce deposed—l know the accused. He had been staying at my hotel for some considerable time. He was there on the 14th of this month. I saw him in the morning of that day before going to work. He was apparently suffering from the effects of drink. I saw him again in the evening about 7.30. I was in my private room, and he appeared, and said he came to bid me good-bye. I asked him what was the matter. He replied, “ I have poisoned myself.” I said “ Nonsense; you are excited.” He said he had taken four bottles of poison. He said he was serious. I then asked him where they were, and he replied “ upstairs.” I went upstairs and found four empty bottles on the table in his bedroom (bottles produced). I suppose they contained chlorydine. Two of the bottles were labelled “chlorydine.” I sent for Dr. Pollen, and in the meantime ordered some hot water and mustard to be mixed to give him as an emetic. I also found a document, which I produce, but cannot swear that it is written by the accused. I spoke to accused about two days after he came from the Hospital, and he said he did not remember anything about what had taken place. He was \ery bad during the time the doctor was there. The document was lying near the bottle. Mr. Brassey objected to the documents being put in, because it was not proved that it was in the prisoner’s handwriting. Fifty letters might be found in the room, but they would not be evidence, unless they could be proved to be written by the accused. The Sergeant said he was unable to prove the handwriting, and argued that it could be put in as evidence, whether the writing was proved or not. Mr. Brassey ultimately agreed to allow the document to be read. Examination continued—When Dr. Pollc.i arrived he used the stomach pump and other remedies, after which he was removed to the Hospital. To Mr Brassey—The accused had been drinking. From after conversation with him I should say he did not know what he was about. He had several fits whilst the doctor was present. From his action I should say he was suffering from delirium tremens. Accused told me that he had been taking chlorydine for the last number of years. I cannot distinguish the signature of the document produced. I first told accused at the hospital, what he had been doing, he did not know. To His Worship:—There was a pen and ink on the table in the room. The case was now adjourned till two o’clock in order to get the evidence of Dr. Pollen. On resuming at two o’clock Dr. Pollen deposed—l know accused. I remember the 14th, I was called in to see him at Mr. Joyce’s Hotel. He was in one of the bed. rooms, sitting on the bed, half dressed. He was in convulsions when I arrived first. In consequence of what I was told I examined the room and found some empty bottles on the tables, therefore I concluded it was a case of poisoning. I applied the stomach pump to him, until he got better, I then left him in charge of Mr. Joyce. Afterwards he told me he had been used to taking chlorydine, when he had been drinking heavily I don’t think any person could take two bottles of chlorydine with impunity in one dose. While in the Hospital I should say that he appeared to be suffering from the effects of drink, and not from the dose of chlorydine. To Mr. Brassey—lf accused had been taking chlorydine for the past week, up to the time I applied the stomach-pump, I think I could have detected the smell of chlorydine. From 1 the state he was in, he could not be responsible for his actions at times. Mr. Brassey submitted the evidence did not bear out the charge. Not one title of evidence went to show that this chlorydine was taken with intent to do harm. It was also proved that the accused did not know what he was about on that occasion, on account of his always being under the influence of drink. His Worship said he considered the police were perfectly justified in bringing up this case. The question was whether the accused knew what he was doing when he took the chlorydine. On hearing the evidence of Dr. Pollen, he did not think he (the accused) did. After further remarks, and after administering a caution to the accused, he dismissed the case.