RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume I, Issue 19, 11 May 1867, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Greytown, May 9, 1867. (Before H, S. Wardell, Esq., R.M.) Braggins v. Udy—This was an adjourned case, to try whether the rate now in force was a legal one. Mr. Wardell stated in giving his judgement that the rate was a legal one—but that the appointment of Mr. Braggins as collector was illegal—that he had no power to sue, inasmuch as he was appointed by the School Committee instead of the public meeting as required under the provisions of the Education Act. Plaintiff non-suited with costs. McCulloch v. Whyte—(Adjourned case), This was an action to recover a sum of money due for falling bush, wages, &c. During the hearing plaintiff was much excited, and elected to take a non-suit. During the examination it was noticed that jjlaintiff had in his possession a pistol, which in his then state the Magistrate thought it prudent to take from him. J. Leyden v. Sage—Assault. The plaintiff on being sworn stated that on the 3rd May, between the hours of six and seven, Mr. Sage came to his house, and enquired whether any cattle of his had been abcut his premises during the day, he replied in the affirmative, and requested defendant to keep his cattle off his land or he would be obliged to take other steps to make him do so. Defendant replied “ that he had as much right there as he had for all he knew.” On this defendant came up to the kitchen window where he was standing, and called on him to “ shape,” and on drawing his hands from his trousers pockets observed by the light gleaming from the kitchen a knife. Plaintiff said, “ is that the game you are up to,” and drawing back to the door, laid hold of a broom that he found standing there, and pushed him back, with the hairy end in the face, on which he picked up a stone. Plaintiff and defendant’s wives, together with the men in plaintiff's employ then laid hold of them, and tried to prevent further violence. About ten minutes afterwards plaintiff was struck with a stone thrown by defendant, which felled him to the ground insensible. Cross-examined by defendant—lt was twilight when I first saw defendant; I did not threaten him, nor offer any violence ; I had no scraper in my hand, nor had I one on my premises ; I believe Dr. Smith attended me.

H. Clarke, who was in plaintiff’s employ, and present on the occasion, corroborated the foregoing evidence with the exception of that portion relating to seeing a knife. Dr. Smith, being called stated—That being called on the evening of the 3rd May, he arrived at plaintiffs house at about ten o’clock, found him in bed, he stitched up the wound which was a contused lacerated one about one inch in length leaving the bone bare; the wound was evidently caused by a heavy blunt instrument.

Defendant in defence stated, that he admitted having thrown a stone, but that the plaintiff had aggravated him, and that' they had for a long time been on bad terms. Defendant was lined £l, together with costs and doctor's attendance, amounting in all to £4 18s. 2d., or in default one month’s imprisonment. Defendant elected the latter.

Johnson v. Paul—Detinue, £lO. This was an action to recover carpenter’s tools. Verdict for plaintiff, after deducting carriage and costs. The application of Mr. Jones for a public house at Masterton was adjourned to Fcathdrston on the following morning, when it was granted.