MANGAORE DEBATING SOCIETY

Shannon News, 2 September 1927, Page 3

MANGAORE DEBATING SOCIETY

MOCK COURT. Mock Court proceedings were held by the Mangaore Debating Society on Wednesday evening, the 24th ultimo, before a record attendance. The case that came under discussion was a civil one, viz., Willie Henry Gregorie (W. H. Gregory), marfiet gardener, at Mangaore, v. Jack Silent Burgess (J. S. Burgis), proprietor of the Mangaore Cow Association; plaintiff claiming the sum of five shillings for alleged damage to his prize cabbage gardens bv the Association’s cows.

Lord Arapeti (J. H. Roberts) and Lord Mangaore (I. R. Robinson) occupied the bench, and Messrs Snark (F. Goldsmith) and Nark (A. R. Blackwood) were respective counsels for the plaintiff and defendant. Mr J. Douglas . (D. Jamieson) capably handled the Olerk of Court ’s duties, and the Court Orderly, Sergt. Keg (K. Logan) had a strenuous time in keeping an unruly Court in order, - and in the course of his duties ejected one person. The following jury was empanelled: Patrick McHugh (H. Patterson), Anasratia O’Grady (Mrs Owen), and William Bertie Goodbeliere (W. B. King). .•Witnesses called for the plaintiff were: Messrs B. M. Chrystall (student), J. Gagliardi (neighbour), D. Owen (Welsh farmer, whose evidence was interpreted), W. A. Surridge (operator). Witnesses called for the defendant were Messrs J. H. Crawford (rival market gardener), K. S. Henry (retired dairy fanner), A. S. Coates (expert poiutry farmer), and H. Blyth (operator). . » Other evidence brought into court was a bag of cabbage stalks and plants, and the Association’s cow, “Tui, ” which was enacted by Messrs N. Porter and R. Burgis. After all the - evidence had been lirought forward, the respective counsels addressed the jury and their lordships, and on behalf of their clients requested the jury to listen to their appeals for a reasonable decision in their final verdict. Before the jury retired, their lordships gave their addresses in summing up and stated that not one of the witnesses’ evidence was reliable, especially the student, who did not know where he was domiciled, and the Welshman, who had been trifling with the Court.

The jury retired for a very few minutes and the verdict was a favourable one. The plaintiff was allowed one penny damages and the witnesses were allowed the usual fees. This being the Society’s third series of debate, the Mock Court proved quite a success and everyone enjoyed the three hours’ entertainment offered. Humorous and- witty evidence was the order of the evening and Messrs Blackwood and Goldsmith are to be congratulated on their great effort in bringing the evening to the successful conclusion that was recorded.