RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1446, 24 December 1885, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka—Wednesday, Dec. 23, 1885. [Before J. Beswick, Eeq., R.M.] ALLKGED ASSAULT. Hayes v. Campbell. Mr Aspinrtll appeared for the complainant and Mr Tosswill for the defence. Mr Tosswill said the summons had oi>ly been served at 6 o'clock on the previous evening, and he applied for an adjournment. He had had no time to prepare his defence. Even in a civil case 48 hours were given, and in this case the summons had only been served at a late hour the previous night. Mr Aapintill would ask that the case should be gone on with. The defendant was the aggressor, and he should be prepared with his defence. His Worship said he did not see that. He thought the request for an adjournment a very reasonable one. Mr Tosswill said he thought it was a pity that the case had been gohe on with at all. There was no need for it. Mr Aspinall said that would be seen whin the case was heard.

His Worship having concurred, Mr Aspinall asked what about the costs.

Ha had brought five witnesses to the Court.

Mr Tosswill : Brought them a hundred yards to the Court ! His Worship said he did not think the summons should have been issued so late, and adjourned the case till the 6th January, 1886, remarking that the question of costs would be considered at a later period. POLICE V. JKNTON. Robert Fenton was then charged with having; on the 19th of D?cerarmr, been drunk whilst in charge of a horse in the public stree's of Temuka ; with using obscene language on the same date ; and with resisting the constable in the executirn of his duty. Mr Lynch with Mr Aspinall appeared for the accused, who pleaded" Not Guilty." His Worship said they would hear the three charges at one time. All the witnesses were ordered out of Court and Constable Morton asked whether be should also retire. Mr Lynch, sail be had no objection to the Constable remaining, and the case proceeded. John Lake Cooke, schoolmaster, at Winchester, said he remembered being with the accused on Saturday last, the 19th of this month. He went with the , accused to Timaru, and camo back with him. He remembered driving along the streefs of Temuka that evening, and passing the Constable at the north end of the town. The accused was driving and he stopped the horse some distance after passing the Constable. He (witness) thought it was about a bun-

dr<Tl yards after passing the Constab'e that the horse whs stopped. The Constable parsed them in the road. Fenton was not drank.

Constable Morton : Was he sober f The Witness: He seemei perfectly capable—

13ia Worship :Do you mean to say, yon, a schoolmaster, cannot answer a question like that ?

The witness said he did not wish to evade the question.

Constable- Morton : Was he drunk, or sober and in his rational senses ?

His Worship : Let him answer the question : Was h* drank ? Witness : He would say Fenton was sober, and was perfectly capable of walking, driving, or speaking, but he ibought he had had drink.

Constable Morton : You had been with him to Timaru. Can you inform the Court how much drink he had had f The witness said he did not khow Mr Lynch objected to the question. His Worship said it was of no consequence.

The witness then contiuued : After arriving at Ternuka we atayed at Siegert and Fauvel's, and after a short time we went on, We drew up, aud Fenton asked for a light. Whiio waiting, Constable Morton passed and Fenton coughed. Morton turned quickly round and said : "Is it me you want f" Fenton replied " No, I don't speak to the likes of you—a low fellow like you —you have robbed mo out of thousands of pounds." I got out of the trap and told Morton that Fenton's troubles were bothering him, and that he connected him (Morton) with them. I told him that his wife was seriously ill, and put it to him us the father of a family to go on and there would be no breach of the peace, Morton seemed at first inclined to go on, but did not.

To" Constable Morton : He did not call y< (i "f» s .". The constable asked bim to come down, and he Baid " I will, you dop." There were five children in the trap. The constable then commenced to unharness the horse. All had to get out of the trap. Fenton got out, and there was a lot of struggling on the ground he might say. The Constable : Ycfu say he coughed when I came up ?

Witness : Yes. The Constable : Was it not like the yell of a wild beast ?

Mr Lynch wanted to know whether the Constable knew what the yell of a wild beast was like. Witness to the Constable : I did not hear him call you a s . I was in a better position than you were to sea what took place. You were whUe with passion and trembling with rage. His Worship said he thought tho witness had tetter be let go.

Before the next witness was called, Mr Lynch said ha hoptd the Constable would lot the ffitnees give his evidence in his own way and not put words into hia mouth.

o. W. Higgins : I am a carpenter, and remember seeing Fenton and the. Constable opposite ray residence on Saturday last. The first I knew of it was by my wife saying that there was something up between Morton and Fenton.

Mr Lynch objected to the witness saying anything about what hit wife told him. Let him tell the Court what he saw.

His Woiship said the witness was all right. He could tell hts story in his own way.

The witness then continued ; Morton was standing on the off side of the horse. He then caine to the near eide and commenced unbuckling the belly band. Fenton then got down and they began to struggle. I heard bad language used, but 1 could not say what.

To the Constable : I think Fenton ased the word '• s- ."■■ Heap and the Constable would never have got him down if I had not assisted. . Fenton was very rough. Fenton tried to get away and kicked. I could not ca'l to memory the exact expressions Fenton used.

Constable Morton : Did you hear hira call me a " s- ?"

His Worship said the witness had already answered the question. He had stated in his evidence that he did hear the accused call the constable that. He did not know the meaning of the word. If a man had called him a " s " he should have thought that he meant that he was rather thick id the head.

Constable Morton said it was a term connected with an unmentionable crime.

Witness to Mr Lynch : The word used was not " dog." John Heap : I remember the occurrence on Saturday last. Saw Fenton on the ground with Constable Morton I know nothiug of the first part of the row. The Constable called on me to assist him as Fenton was struggling. He was catching hold of Morton's legs. We took him to the lock-up. He was kicking—at least, he tried to kick you (the Constable). I don't know about myself. Mr Lynch objected to leading questions being put to the witness. His Worship said he would stop any questions which were not right. Witness continued : I remember a few of the expressions used by Fenton. He called Morton "ab—— Fenian," « a b Bulgarian," and "ab Orangeman." They were just the words he used, he was so excited. To Constable Morton : J remember him calling you " as ," but I do not remember much.

Mr Lynch hoped that special attention would be given to the last utterance of the witness'.

His Worship said h< did not think the Constable bad sustained the charge. His own witnesses hau failed to prore it. At the some time, Fenton—

Constable Morton asked that the case miff lit be concluded. His Worship : But your own witnesses were against you. Constable Morton said the witnesses collprl were 82 much for the other side as for his. His Worship : As the game time, Fenton, there is a long list of case* against you, and it is evident you had been taking some drink, "iou must be more careful. The case is dismissed. Mr Lynch applied lor costs for the witnesses for the defence, but His Worship declined to allow them. CIVIL Casbs. Douglas v. Orr—Claim L2 Bs. The plaintiff said the defendant had given him a cheque on Monday, but there was no date on it. It had not been presented. Ho had objected to take the cheque, as it did not allow for costs. . The defendant did not appear, •nd his Worship gave judgment for plaintiff, with costs, remarking that he must return the cheque. Friedlander Bros. v. Siegert and Fauvel. Interpleader case. Mr Purnell appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr Raymond for the defendants.

Rudolf Friedlander, onecf the plaintiffs, proved making an advance of L4O to lilson, and taking a bill of sale over liis property, including" Young Biuelight." The bill of sale wai to cover the advance'of L4O, and further advances if they were made. When asking for the advance Tilson told him that he wanted the money for some land. The witness did not know till the bill of sale was being signed on the 13 ? h November that Siegert aud Fauvel had got a judgment out against lilson, and Tilson then stated that judgment was stayed pending a cross action. The witness could not state whether any further advances bad been made, as he did not usually conduct the business of the firm. He declined to say whether, if Siegert and Fauvel were to pay the L4O, thpy would give up the bill of sale. ]n cross-examination be admitted having said something to that effect to Mr Siegert that morning. J. Siegert gave evidence, proving that Biegert and Fauvel got judgment against Tilson for L 32 lis 6J. on the 4th November, He valuod the articles in the bill of sale at about L2OO. He would advance LIOO on tbem. The judgment against Tilson was still outstanding, except as regards the money paid iuto Court. Mr Raymond then addressed the Court at great length, contending that the bill of sale w»s given by Tilson for the purpose of defeating his creditors. This was shown by the smalt amount of the advance made, and the value of the security. He quoted largely from law books in support of his case. ■

Mr Pumell replied on behalf of the plaintiffs, stating that the authorities quoted bad no bearng on the case, and quoting others to show that the bill of sale would hold good in any case. Ha held that there was not the least bit of evidence given tending to 6how fraud. His Worship said he thought there was no evidence before the Court to show fraud. The bill of sale was giren on the 13th November, and judgment was given on the 4th in this Court in the case of Siegert and Fauvel v. Tileon. There was nothing to show thai Friedlunder was aware, and the Court was not aware, that Tilson's statement to Friedlander was not a true one. There was nothing before the Court to show that Tilson bad not got the L4O to settle with Siegert and Fauvel. The evidence ol Mr StPerert only went to show that be got judgment and let it sleep for some days. He must give judgment for Friedlander Bros., with solicitor's costs L2, and Court costs, lie declined to allow Mr Friedlander costs, as he was a party to the suit. The Court then rose.