RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume VI, Issue 1835, 19 November 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

THIS DAT. fßofore W. Fbaseb, Esq., R.M.) DRUNKENNESS.

Temaru (a native) was charged with having been drunk and disorderly in Pollen-street, Shortland, on the 18th instant. Defendant pleaded guilty, and was fined 10s, or 24 hours' imprisonment. John Sergeant was charged with having been drunk and incapable. On being called the defendant presented a pitiable appearance, shaking all over, in a degree little less than a person afflicted with St. Vitas' Dance. His "Worship ordered him to be taken to the watch-house again for medical examination.

BREACH OF THE lICENSING- ACT

Charles Curtis was charged with having committed a breach of the Licensing Act, 1873, Amendment Act, 1874, by employing a female in the bar of the Pacific Hotel after the hour of Jl p.m. This case was adjourned from the 16th instant on account of the absence of a material witness.

Mi charge Mr. Macdonald, who appeared for defendant, intimated that he had no objection, and the case was accordingly struck out.

Bullen asked to withdraw the

ALLEGED ASSAULT,

Edwin Binney was charged with that he did unlawfully assault one Frederick A. Pulleine by seizing him by the collar and throwing him down.

Mr. Macdonald appeared for complainant ; Mr. Brassey for defendant. Mr. Macdonald said inasmuch as the assault had taken place in defendant's store, he would explain the circumstances of the case so far as he was acquainted with them. It appeared that some time ago a certain firm got into difficulties, and the estate was rested in trustees one of whom was Mr. Pulleine, the complainant. A telegram from the trustees in Auckland authorised Mr. Binney to take charge of the property; he did so, and amongst other things took possession of money to the amount of £30. Subsequently a Mr. Atkin was sent from Auckland to take charge of the property and dispose of it. He (Mr. Atkin) employed the services of Mr. Pulleine as auctioneer, and Mr. Pulleine went to Mr. Binney to obtain the £30. Mr. Binney said he would not relinquish possession of the money unless his accounts were deducted. And the assault complained of then took place. It appeared that the cause of difference was the employment of another auctioneer than Mr. Binney. There .was a certain amount of feeling exhibited in putting complainant out.

His Worship said, supposing Mr. Pulleine had entered Mr. Binney's store and refused to depart when requested, he (Mr. Binney) would be justified in putting him out with just sufficient violence to effect his purpose. So long as there was no auction being held in the store it was Mr. Binney's private premises, and when ordered to leave he should have done so. If Mr. Binney had exercised more than sufficient violence in expelling him, he would be liable.

Mr. Macdonald admitted that the Court was right to a certain extent, but supposing a person was in his castle, and peremptorily told another to " go," without previous intimation, he would not be justified in at once proceeding to make him go. Besides Mr. Puileine was there for a lawful purpose. His Worship said if sufficient time was given, there was justification. It did not matter about whether the purpose was lawful or otherwise.

Mr. Macdonald said the Court would probably find that Mr. Binney had not acted as it conceived, from a desire to resent intrusion, but that there had been a great deal of feeling displayed. His Worship said in that case some allowance ought to be made for Mr, Binney's mortification. It seemed that Mr. Pulleine provoked Mr. Binney, and he (His Worship) would have been inclined to forgive him if he had turned to and given him a good hammering. Mr. Macdonald said he was informed that Mr. Pulleine labored under physical dieability at the time.

His Worship said it would certainly be an aggravation of the offence to «trike a cripple. It was decided to hear the evidence, His Worship remarking that it would be better to settle such disputes privately. The first witness called was—

F. A. Pulleino, auctioneer in Grahamstown, who deposed—That he knew Mr. Binney, who was an auctioneer. Knew the firm of Murphy Bros. Their estate became vested in trustees, of whom he (witness) was one. On the authority of the trustees Mr. Binney took over a portion of the estate. Amongst the property of which he took possession was a sum oi naoney, £30. Knew Mr. Atkin, who was subsequently authorised to take charge of the property. ! Mr. Atkin went to get the money from Mr. Binney, but came back without it. Witness then went, accompanied by Mr. Atkin. That was the occasion upon which the assault took place. Mr. Atkin was present all the time. Witness said to Mr. Binney that this matter had not been settled, and requested Mr. Binney to give him the £30. Mr... Binney said he would n»fc unless his account was recognised. Witness told him.not to bo foolish, but to give •up the money. Mr. Binney then ordered him out, but witness said "let us settle this matter before I go." With that Mr. Binney caught him by the throat and knocked him down. He was lame at the. time, his ankle having been sore for six weeks, and Mr. Binney in the confusion consequent upon the throwing down process kicked his (witness') ankle. It had not improved the sore. He said nothing more than related to provoke Mr. Binney. Mr. Binney said he would not give the money unless his account was recognised. Mr. Binney received the money a fortnight back. The assault took place on Friday. Witness had sold seme things in tho meantime.

By Mr. Brassey—l gave no provocation. I was told to go out of the office, I only said he was foolish to be obstructive. Did not call him a fool. Mr. Binney did not tell me to go out more than once. The assault did not do my sore foot aay good. The action of putting me down and telling me to go was simultaneous. I did not say "it would take a better man than you to put rae out." Mr. Atkin was appointed to get the money. The order was signed by three trustees. In the face of Mr. Atkins being refused I went to Mr. Binney.

W. T. Atkin, deposed—That he had accompanied Mr. Pulleine to Mr. Binney's on the occasion in question. Mr. Pulleine asked Mr. Binney if he would give the £30. Mr. Binney said he would not do so unless his account was deducted therefrom. Mr. Pulleine then said "you had better give me this money, Binney, or else you will get into trouble." IVfr. Bin? ney then told him to go, and in answer wa3 told that the nioney Trust be handed 'over first, whereupon Mr. Binney prqceeded to eject him in the manner described.

By Mr. Brassey: I neverjheard Mr,

Pulleine call Mr. Binney a fool. I never heard him say it, would take a better man than him (Mr. Binney) to put him out. By tho Court: I suppose the complainant was bundled out in about three seconds. I think more force was used, than, was necessary.

Mr. Brassey did not call any evidence.

His Worship said—lt is just possible that Mr. Binney used more fore* than, was necessary, and under Ihe.«e circumstances I will fine him a shilling without costs. •

The Court then adjourned.