RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thames Star, Volume XII, Issue 3932, 5 August 1881, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

THIS DAT.

(Before H. Kenrick, Esq., 8.M.)

ASSAULT,

Thomas Millett was charged with assaulting James Burns at Sunbeam Creek last Saturday.

Complainant deposed that ho was going home on Saturday afternoon when he saw defendant working in his garden, opposite a claim in which he had a tribute. Plaintiff had some conversation with him relative to the claim, in the course of which defendant called him a liar. As defendant seemed surly, plaintiff walked on, but defendant rushed out after him with a spade. Plaintiff entreated him not to,strike him. and he then dropped the spade, picked up some .-tones, and struck him on the nose with one. Defendant then rushed on him. collared him, and threw him into a ditch, striking him heavily on the chest with bis knee. He went home, and afterwards went down to Dr Payne, as his chest was very painful. (He handed into the Court a certificate from Dr Payne as to the injuries received). The same evening he laid the information ■gainst defendant. He had two or three glasses of schnapps that afternoon, but was not the worse for liquor. Defendant then made a statement to the effect that he had not left his garden all the time plaintiff was near, nor had he lifted his hand to plaintiff, or touched him in any way. Plaintiff seemed to be under the influence of liquor. He had never, therefore had a quarrel with him. : Sergeant' Major O'Grady deposed that plaintiff came to his office on the Saturday night and laid an information against defendant for assault. He showed him

the blow on his nose, and complained of his chest. He was excited, witness thought from the effects of drink. His Worship said it was very evident one or the other had sworn falsely, and he would therefore dismiss the case. : INBt7LTIN& LANGUAGE.

Edmund George was charged with using insulting laneuage towards Robert Higgins on last Wednesday afternoon. >:Plaintiff deposed that he was at his house on last Wednesday, when he saw ■■■■ defendant, who lived opposite, bartering with a native about apis. He thought the barter was concluded, and went over and asked the native how much he wanted for the pig. Defendant evidently thought he was interfering, and threatened to kick him, and would no doubt have done so , had not defendant's son stopped him. Defendant bad frequently used strong • language to him before, and he had every reason to suppose it would be repeated. Edmund George deposed that on the ,-day in question a native came to his 'father's house with a pig. The native and his father started bargaining about ; the price, and before the transaction was over plaintiff came over and also started bargaining for the pig. His father then got excited, and threatened to kick plain'i; tiff: He did not know of any previous quarrel between the parties. He did not hear plaintiff barter for the pig, but supposed that was what he was doing> as he was a rival tradesman.

Defendant admitted that he had used the wor,ds complained of, but said the plaintiff was interfering with him while he was doing business. His Worship dismissed the ease, ordering both parties to pay their own costs. Court adjourned.

A Vermont clergyman makes the future of good Christians clear by saying: "After crossing the mystic river, we shall go from the man to the angel, from the angel to the archangel, from the archangel to the celestial, from the celestial to the divine, and then, gathering the stars in clusters about our heads, dream out the endless dream of eternity."