POLICE COURT.-Saturday.

Thames Advertiser, Volume VII, Issue 1884, 2 November 1874, Page 3

POLICE COURT.-Saturday.

(Before W. Fraser, Esq., 8.J1.) Bukach of Municipal By-Laws.— George Fisher was charged with allow* ing a horse to wander at large in Greystreet, Shortland, on the 27th inst. He admitted the offence, and was fined 2s 6d and costs —Janus Morrow was charged with allowing three cowb to wander at liirgein Willoughby-s:reet, Shortland, on the 28th inst.-He admitted that the cows were at large. They got loose, and lie had 18s poundage fees to pay. He was fined 7s 6d and costs.

Abusive Language.-Peter Jack was charged with making use of abusive ami threatening language in a public place, to wit, on the" Prince Imperial claim, towards one Clara Ashton, wi(h intent to provoke a brpach of the peace.— Mr Tyler appeared for the* complainant, and Mr Macdonald for the defendant — .Mr Tyler opened the case by detailing the circumstances, and stated the language complained of.—Mr Macdonald said they had no intention of denying the language having been used, nor would they attempt to justify it. On behalf of Mr Jack he would apologise for it.—Mr Tyler consented to accept the apology. Of course, in regard to the second case, it was a matter of costs.. It appeared from subsequent conversation that the circumstances arose oat of an allotment on the goldfield, which was pegged out by defendant, and which was occupied by the phintiff and her husband. The case was admitted as proved.

A ssault. —Henry Wilson, Mary Wilson and Olara A shton were charged with assaulting Peter Jack.—This case arose out of the former one.—Mr Tyler for the defence and Mr Macdonald for the plaintiff.—lt was agreed to hear the evidence of both cases together.—Clara A shton deposed she resided with her husband on the Prince Imperial claim. Her husband and Mr Jack had some conversation regarding the rent. Her husband asked whether he had any right to rent. Jack called her dreadful names in the presence of her husband and several people. Her husband had an axe, which he was about to give Jack to drive in the peg. He also called Mrs Wilson dreadful nanjes, and iV r8 Wilson's husband took up the axe, when Jack ran away. He called her those names inside and outside the fence. —Mary Anne Wilson, wife of Henry Wilson, deposed: Knew Mr Jack, but did not know any good of him. She thea gave her version of the transaction. He called her ill names and caught her by the arm, and held the axe over her head. Her husband then rushed at Jack, and he ran away down the hill. She heard him call Mrs Ashton the names complained of. Neither Mrs Ashton nor herself touched Jack at all.—Henry Wilson, husband of last witness, deposed that he went up to see Mr and Mrs Ashton. He heard Jack call his wife bad names. She remonstrated. He caught her arm and lifted the axe, and said you b I'll kill you. As the axe was falling witness caught it and struck Jack, who then ran away. He also heard Jack call Mrs Ashton fearful names, not fit foerepetition. Neither Mr Ashton nor his: wife had struck Jack. He just succeeded in saving his wife's life. He intended to take proceedings in reference to it after this was settled, but he had made no complaints to the police yet.—John Ashi ton was also examined, and corroborated the evidence previously given. -T. A. Bell, assistant to the Mining Inspector, j was also examined. He was with Mr | Jack in the exercise of his duty at the time of the occurrence complained of. He corroborated the testimony of the previous witnesses. He saw a pick thrown down the hill by Wilson after Jack, and Mrs Wilson threw a stone or a piece of mullock after him. He did not think the dispute was with regard to putting in the pegs, but about the names which Jack called the woman.—Mr Mac-: donald addressed the Court.—-In the first I case his Worship inflicted a fine of 40s I and costs, and the second was dismissed with costs. He would have inflicted a more severe penalty in the first case, only that the, costs were heavy.—The costs amounted to £5 12s. . '