RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2006, 11 February 1890, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka—Saturday, Feb. 8, 1890. [Before Captain C. A. Wray, R.M.] ALLEGED assault. Robert Feoton was brought up on remand, charged with having on the 23rd January last, unlawfully, wilfully, and malicious'y assaulted oue Mary Bates, aod ioflicied grievous bodily harm. Mr H«y iippeared for prisoner, and asked that the case might be proceeded with, and the -tepositioos of Mary Bites taken, as he was prepared to prove that the injuries resulted from a fall which was caused by an accident. His Worship decided to hear the evidence in suppoit of the charge. Constable Morion deposed aa follows : On the afternoon of the 23rd January 1 went to the Temuka Hotel between 4 and 5 p.m. I went to the back of the hotel, and entered the washhouee. Found the prisoner there. He was drunk. His wife was there, with hia eldest daughter, aged about 17, anJ Mis Bales, who was sealed in an arm choir, and appeared to bq suffering great pain. When I inquired whv I h-id been sent for Mrs Bates said that she had come to the rescue of her daughter (Mrs FentoD) and remonstrated with prisoner, saying, " Oh, Robert ! what are you doing." He hud then drawn his hand and struck.her onjthe left breast, when she fell down on the outside edge of tbe verandah by the washhouse and hurt her hip. I suggested that the doctor should be seot for. I did not tako any proceedings until I heard how Mrs Bates progressed. Three days afterwards I was informed that she was in a dangerous state. The information was then laid, and Fenton arrested on the evening of the 30th. Dr Hayes siid that Mrs Bates was in a very dangerous state, and the matter having been represented to Mr K. F. Gray, J.P., her depositions were taken that night übyut 10 o'clock, in the presence °of prisoner, his wife, and the nurse. He had an opportunity of. cross-examining her, and asked one question as to whether he had struck her intentionally. Prisoner was released on bail and remanded until > the Ist inst., when he appeared, and was further remanded to Timaru gaol for eight days, bail being refused. To Mr Hay : On the 23rd inst. did not ask Mrs Bates how she had been struck. She showfld no her left arm, which was bruised from the wrist to the elbow. It appeared to be an injury such as would result from falling on the edge of a board and not from a blow. The verandah is narrow and railed about six inches from the ground. Should not have laid the information if Mrs Bates had not been seriously injured. She did not'express any deuire that the information shook' be laid . She told tue that she is 79 years of age this month. I should say that she is , not a strong woman. When her depositions were being taken she said—" He struck me with his hand and I immediately went down." Mrs Fenton suggested that it was a push, and she replied fiat she had spoken the truth nod could not go back from it, but she would suy as litUe as possible. To the Bench : When Feoton w*3 out on b-iil he was a nuisance, drunk all the time, and the noise h« made io the house terrified Mrs Bates. If he had kept sober he would not have been deprived of his liberty. Ha is the owner and licensee of the Temuka Hotel. He has been for about five weeks. ° Dr John Shaw Hayes gave the following evidence :—Was called in on January 23rd to see Mrs Bates ut the Temuka Hotel. Found her in a good deal of pain chiefly i D , h 6 hip, whioh I examined. She was suffering from shock, and in a nervous and excited couditbn. Sent her to bed and ordered stimulants and restoratives. Found & mark on her cheer a red mark, not a bruise. It might hav e been caused by a strong pressure or a blow. She complained of pain and tenderness when it was touched. Examined her ogain the next day, and the mark had disappeared. Found extensive bruises on the arm, and swelling and a eood deal of pain and tenderness on tho hip. I suspected that there ,vas a fracture of the neck of the thigh bone, which is a common injury in old people in casea like this. 1 do not now think that there was any fracture of the bone. She was in a | critical state at one time, rfhe j a better now, but not yet out of danger. An injury like this is more serious to an old person than to a young one. Prisoner was very rowdy when he was out on bail The patient was in terror of him nil the time. To Mr Hay : Before prisoner was arrested I told the constable that his conduct was interfering with the recovery of ,

Mrs Bates. T attach little significance to the mark on the chest. In itself it was not serious. The injuries she was suffering from were the result of the fall and the shock to her system. Constable Morton asked for a remand for a week, to enable Mrs Bates to come personally before the court and give -- evidence. Mr Hay asked that the evidence for the defence might be taken and the case decided, as he was prepared to prove that no assault had been committed ; that the prisoner had no hostile intentions with regard to Mrs Bates, and that they had always lived on moat friendly term?. His Worship said that it was evident that the mao was a drunkard, and that he had caused the injury, although he might have done so unintentionally. It was necessary that the case should stand over until it was seen how the patient progressed. Mr Hay urged that bail should be allowed, as Fenton wished to sell his property, having decided that the trade was unsuitable for him. His Worship was of opinion that prisoner should not be allowed at large. He would probably cause further barm, and the matter should not be left to chance. The Bench would be willing to allow him to go to Christchurch, if substantial guarantees were obtained for his reappearance when necessary, and that he would not go near the hotel; but would not trust him personally, us he was a drunkard, and therefore unreliable. Prisoner was then remanded for eight days, with the understanding (hat he should be allowed to visit Christchurch provided substantial guarantees were obtained as above. The court then rose. Monday —Feb. 10,1890, [Before J. Talbot and J. Guild, Esqs., o. P.’s CITIIi CASES. J. M. Twomey v. S. Chapman claim £1 6s. J. M. Twomey, plaintiff, stated that the defendant was a subscriber to the Gsealidinb Guardian. The amount sued for was subscription from April 17, 1884, to April 17, 1885. Frequent applications had been made to defendant who stated that he had ordered the paper to be stopped previously. He had offered to pay 29s in settlement. The order produced to stop the paper came through the post and waa received on April 14. He accepted delivery of the paper up to that date. The defendant, sworn, said the paper was ordered for 6 months and the subscription was paid to plaintiffs agent at the time. Receipts produced. The plaintiff showed that the receipts defendant relied on showed that the subscription had been paid to March 31, 1884. Defendant again stated that be had instructed Mr Fisher, the plaintiffs agent, to stop the paper at the end of 12mosths. They may have come to the office, but be h®d oof taken them away. Defendant denied kuowledge of the order stopping the paper. It might have been written by his wife, but ho would not swear to the handwriting. The bsnch asked why . the matter had not been settled a long time ago. Plaintiff replied that he was adverse to taking legal proceedings unless absolutely necessary. He drew attention to the order before the court stopping the paper on April 14, 3885. That order came through the post. The defendant denied owing the amount. Replying to the Bench, plaintiff said that he had received no intimation that any number of papers addressed to defendant were accumulating at Geraldine. Had that been the eras the agent would have given notice to that effect. Tho Bench thought the case a troublesome, although a small one. The evidence led them to believe (hat Chapman had receiyed the paper?. They would give judgment for amount claimed and cost?. The Court then rose.