RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 1980, 12 May 1875, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

THIS DAY.

Before W. Fbaseb, Esq., E.M. A FEMALE ABUSIST.

j Anne Bradfield was charged with using threatening and insulting language#to one Frances Bastings, on the 7th inst. i Defendant pleaded not guilty. ■■„, .Frances Hastings deposed—l am the wife of Wm, Charles Hastings. He has gone to Tairua. The language took place on Friday afternoon about .threes o'clock. I was in my own yard sowing onion seeds. Defendant was in Mrs Eelsall's yard. My yard is divided from Mrs Kelsall'sby, aiegal fence., I don't know what a legal fence means. The occurrence arose about a chicken belonging to Mrs -Kelsall, which" came 'into my yard, and which I accidentally hurt. Defendant tcok the chicken to Mrs Kelsall, and tried to breed trouble. She also called me a pimp for the bobbies. [A sharp cross fire here took place between the two ladies, His Worship remarkihg|tha!t'th>y -should :be)divided by a creek rather than a fence] Mrs Hastings interpolated : " Yes, indeed, and she wants to be in it with a stone round her neck ; " an amiable suggestion which His Worship discountenanced, telling Mrs Hastings that she was as bad as defendant.

The- daughter of complainant,. a little girl l(i0' years of age) was examined, but her evidence tended rather in favor of defendant.

Mrs Kelsall was called, and wanted to know who was going to pay her expenses. Having been satisfied upon that point, she deposed that her name was Margaret Jane. Defendant said nothing. Mrs Hastings was abusing her, being; in ;^fact, the aggressor; -but defendant returned not a word, merely laughing in scorn.

Defendant made a statement to the effect that she was innocent of the charge made against her, and that moreover she -suffered continual annoyance from Mrs Hastings, who was in the habit of telling her (defendant) that; she had no right to be at large, that she was a lunatic. This was in allusion to a time when defendant had suffered from an illness for which a sojourn in the asylum was necessary. Upon this point defendant appeared to feel very much (though great allowance is usually made for emotional display in Courts); and appealed to the Court as to whether such unwomanly conduct was not calculated to call forth retaliation. His Worship sa;d it' appeared to him that complainant had been the aggressor all the time. He wpuld dismiss the case, complainant to pay costs. , The Court then adjourned.