R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 6, Issue 1760, 13 August 1884, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

; CARTERTON-TUESDAY. (Before H, S, Wakdeu Esq. R.M.) 1 Robert Gill Welch was cbaiged by ' Mv J. J. Pickett, tLat he, being the parent of a certain male child above ■ the age of six months, had neglected [ to have such child vaccinated. On this case being called Mr Pickett said he desired to withdraw the information as the child had been vaccinated since the summons was served, Withdrawn accordingly, I Charles Printzen, a waiter at the Marquis of Normanby Hotel, was charged with having, on the 3rd July last unlawfully assaulted James Smith. Mr Sandilands appeared for the i defendant, and pleaded not guilty. The evidence of the informant went to show that on the day named he went to the Marquis of Mormanby and was standing with his back to the passage and facing the bar, when a man named Forbes came behind him and laid his hands upon his shoulders, forcing him over the bar door. He turned round and pushed Forbes from him, and Forbes fell on a chair and broke it. Defendant then came behind him. caught him by the neck and threw him out of the house, On recovering he went in again to see who it was who had thrown him out, when defendant again seized him from behind round the waist and dragging him, pushed him out of the door. He fell on the steps and broke his collar bone. He had been in the hospital for four weeks, and was not yet able to work, nor would he be for some time to come. On cross-examination complainant admitted that he was rather the worse for liquor, but was not quarrelsome. Witnesses were called on either side, and the defendant, also wishing, to be sworn, gave evidence, The Resident Magistrate, in. giving his decision, said the case as revealed by the evidence was a very unfortunate one for the complainant, and everyone very naturally felt a sympathy with a man who had had bones broken or been seriously injured, In dealing with the case, however, he must put aside any feeling of that kind and decide upon the evidence It appeared that complainant went to the hotel, and while there was insulted and interfered with while he was the guest of the proprietor of the house. It was a duty cast upon the landlord to see that his customers were not annoyed by persons who were perhaps more drunken than themselves, and in this case it appeared that in the first instance the right man to have been thrown out was the man Forbes. Tho complainant, however, as soon as he re-entered the hotel a second time, with, as had been stated, his coat and vest stripped off for a fight, was wrong, and his conduct justified his tben being ejected from ; the premises. The ques tion to be decided was whether more than necessary force had been used, and whether the complainant, through being in the state he was, contributed to his own injury. Tho Court must decide that no more violence was used i than was'necessary to put the complainant out of the house, ard that the i complainant, by the state he was in, contributed to his own injury. The case would be dismsssed, i

There were several civil cases on the list, but .they were of no public interest, most of them being settled out of Court.

GREYTOWN-TUESDAY.

(Before H. &• Wardell, R.M., and S. Revans, J,P.)

J. Morris y. Fabian Bros.—Claim ill 13s. This was a claim for butter alleged to have been sold and delivered to defendants. / Mr Gray for plaintiff, and Mr Sandilands for defendants. The evidence was to the effect that plaintiff went to defendants' store and asked it' they were buyers of salt butter. They said they wore if it was prime. Plaintiff said it was prime and the same evening delivered three casks to defendants. On. sampling the butter the next morning defendants found it was rancid and sent word to plaintiff who was there about. He saidtbat as they had weighed it and put it in their cellar, lie considered the bargain was complete and demanded the money. Defendants told him that they were buyers of prime salt butter only, and as this was not good tbey would, not take it, They subsequently' returned the butter to plaintiff's premises. Judgment for defendants,