COURTS.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 225, 28 June 1872, Page 3

COURTS.

POLICE COURT.— Yesterday [Before W. Eraser, Esq., K.M.]

DRUNKENNESS. J. Nichol and James Steward were fined in the usual amount, with the customary alternative in case of non-payment, for being drunk the previous evening. STRAY QUADRUPEDS. John Gillies was lined 3s for allowing a goat and two kids to wander at large. A. M. West was lined 2s Gd for allowing his horse to stray in Grey-street. Joseph Banks was charged with allowing two horses to stray in the same locality, and was lined in the same amount for each horse. ASSAULT. Frederick Woodward was charged with unlawfully assaulting Ilcnry Kendall, at Shorthand, on the 21st instant, by striking him, knocking him down, and kicking him. A cross information charged Kendall with assaulting Woodward. Mr Tyler appeared for complainant, and Mr Macdonald for defendant. Ilcnry Kendall, who had a black eye and other marks of violence, deposed : I am a miner living at Murphy’s Hill. On the 21st instant I was about to put a chain on some logs when defendant, who was standing by, said something which I don’t remember, and before I could look round he struck me and knocked me down, and whilst I was on the ground he kicked me over the head and face repeatedly. The marks and discoloration on my face near the eye are the results of his blows and kicks. He kept swearing at me all the time, and said that he would make me so that I should carry no more wood down the hill for some time. I asked him if he was going to kdl me. I don’t remember what answer he gave, but he kept kicking me. I caught hold of his leg and tried to stop him. I diil not strike Idm. I had no idea of assaulting him. I did not rush at him nor attempt to hit with a drag chain, or to assault him in any wsy. I had no idea of assaulting him, nor that lie would assault me. I took out a summons on the same day. Dr Sam attended to the wounds I received. I was blind for two days, and bled profusely. Cross-examined by Mr Macdonald: After the assault, I went and fetched some wood, then I went to dinner, then I want to the Police Court, and then to Dr Sam. I bad a drag chain in my hand. I saw defendant on the 20th, when there was some conversation about the log which I was cutting. 11c claimed it as his, and said he bought it. 1 asked him to show me a receipt. I was cutting up the Jog for firewood for myself and mates —not for sale. James McConnell, a boy apparently about 7 years old, living with his parents on Murphy's Hill, who said he did not know his age, did not go to school, could not read or write, was not taught anything at home, was called. The lad was totally ignorant of the nature of an oath, and said he did not know what would be done to him if he u>ld lies,

The R.M. said he could not take the boy’s evidence. Nicholas Rasdon stated that he saw Woodward and Kendall on Murphy’s Hill on the day in question. Heard Woodward say something to some one about keeping a civil tongue in His head. Shortly afterwards Kendall came down tiie hill with his face bleeding. Woodward followed, and asked witness if lie heard the b shouting. George Way said on the day before the assault Kendall and himself were splitting a log on Murphy’s Hill when Woodward claimed the log as his property, but. after some conversation said witness and Kendall could cut it up if they left him a few pieces, which they agreed to do. He was not present when the assault took place. John Wynstick stated that he knew the tree which’Kendall lately cut up and carried away. It had been felled and lyingon the ground for about three years. This was the case for the complainant.

Mr Macdonald submitted that the case had been highly coloured. There had, no doubt, been a fight, of which Kendall got the worst. The R.M. decided to hear the crossaction before giving his decision. Frederick Woodward then deposed that on the day in question (21st inst.) Kendall was removing the wood. Witness remonstrated, and said Kendall should not remove it. He then made use of very bad language, and lushed at witness with the drag chain, and witness then struck him and knocked him down, but did not kick him.

The R.M. said there could be no doubt an assault had been committed, and the question was, was there provocation. Had medical testimony been called and proved injuries the result of kicking ho certainly should not have given the defendant Woodwaid the option of paying a fine. Under the circumstances lie should order defendant to pay a fine of 40s or in default be imprisoned for 7 days. The case against Kendall would be dismissed.

The defendant asked the R.M. if he would give him time to pay. The UAL said lie was doubtful whether he had the power to do so, hut after consideration said he would allow defendant seven days to pay the money in, but if the tine was not then paid defendant would have to go to gaol for seven days.