POLICE COURT.-Yesterday.

Thames Advertiser, Volume VII, Issue 1909, 3 December 1874, Page 3

POLICE COURT.-Yesterday.

(Before W. RUser, Esq., 8.M.) Assault. — Sichard Schofield was charged with assaulting one John Graham on the 30th ulfc.—Mr Macdonald for plaintiff, and Mr Tyler for defendant. It appeared that plaintiff and defendant were joint owners in a tribute Some dispute arose between them, and when plaintiff went to work defendant took him by the throat and turned him out.- John Graham deposed that he was a miner employed in the Inverness' tribute, in which Schofield and himself had interests. He had been working there since July last. They had two crushings, and he had his share of the proceeds. The assault he complained of took place on Monday morning, in the chamber of the lower drive. Others were present. Witness was at work when defendant came in in a bullying manner. He asked what right he had there, why did he not send aaother man in his place P Witness said he had as good a right there as he had. Defendant then took him by the back of the neck, and wrenched the pick out of his hand, and threatened to strike him. He had repeatedly been interfered with since last crushing, a fortnight ago. Witness did not know the cause why he assaulted him—Cross-examinedi Witness became a shareholder in July last by purchase from his son, T. J. Graham. The defendant knew it from the first day he went to work. • He first went to work, for Mr Schofield in the Waikatb, subsequently he worked for his son and himself, but the share became wholly his own within the fortnight. He told Schofield that he had then the full share, and claimed a right to be there at tho time of the assault., Schofield said that he had no business there, that he was no shareholder. He called him ab- old loafer. It was since the last dividend -that witness beoame: a full shareholder. —Mr Tyler contended that the jurisdiction of the Court was ended by a section of Justice of the PeaceAct, as the contest arose out of a title.— Mr. Macdonald replied that it would not he Sufficient to raise a question of ] plaintiff's title to the tribute, in order to evade the consequences of the assault by ousting the jurisdiction of the Court.—His Worship said that so long as the questionof title arose at all it ousted his jurisdiction. —Mr Macdonald argued tho question at considerable length. The defendant was discharged.—Mr Tyler applied for costs, which were granted,. amiuatiue to £1169 6d.

HoE9K at Labge.—John Nioholls was charged with allowing a horse to wander in Guay-streot, ShortUud, oa tho 26th' ulfc,~ Defendant pleaded guilty,'a,ud' was %ed 2s 6d and Qo&t% ■•■;.■.■