R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume X, Issue 3107, 18 January 1889, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

MASTEKTON-THUItSDAY. ' (Before S. Von Stunner, B.Jt) ! - neighbour's nisroras, Hugh Mawhinay v B. Maguire, charge of malicious injury to property and threatening language, Mr Skipper for plaintiff, Mr Pownall for defendant. • ■ Plaintiff deposed that he was a wbod dealer residingiiiilasterton. He had the right to cutwefeao'n Car-' man and .Mutrie's land. For this purpose he built a rough bridge over' !t v ereek. He; refused to'allow defen-' . 3aut to use this bridgo, and ho in'' .consequence built a.'..bridgb alongside • of witnesses., Witness nailed a, stout

sapling along ;the edge of ; the, bridge. with Bixinchi spikes.'■ It'was securely! 1 fixed, -and on the 11th instant he ! found it had been violently wrenobed - off and ■ taken away. Maguirou 1 acknowledged he did it.. 4sbewii|j 1 passing noxfc day witness asked him ' what ho removed the pole for, when 'Maguire replied, You d—- 'Fenian b—■l'll serve;you.the I .same and chuck you into the creek. He then jumped out of his cart and rushed up' to witness with his clenched fists in a threatening altitude, ■> and said '.' if you're a man come on and take it out of me." Witness taidhe would deal with him in another maimer, Alter further provoking language defendant left, .Witness was afraid defendant would repeat the violent conduct and throw ,him- into the oreekifhegot thechahce.j Witnoss;". came into town and took out' a summons against him. Croß3-Bx«mmea by;-; Mr Powiiall: There was no jealousy on his part towards Maguire. Maguire came [through his gate; without leave. He .■locked the gate to keep the sheep in. ■Hoprotested against'Maguire using' ; ln| sept ;: acbill;to• $ ' 'Magttire'foV'i? for" breakmg dbwrj, hiij gate and Mateiief sumtoons; ;',;Waspo't; ;awafe ;^hat- 11 Magmre ; htid^piis)ion ! the[S jqad';frbr4sr RXutrie,"-' (Fheppl'jS-i''' ;mpve4 'tv a 3' the ^ s: psa i' : ■ was and witness to jipeak. /■• Maguire ti& offered him nb,violence' sinoe. - '. y -"'vj■ ;v :■■ Isaac Mawhinay' corroborated; si(ji ;^ ":

ovidoiice bf.tfie last with csh as to the ' :■. threatening language. • For the defence Robert Muguire Reposed that ho had built for himself abridge over theereok in Nursery Koad, lie crossed the corner of plaintiff's bridge which overlapped the road, On the day in question he , went into the bush, and when he came out he found himself confronted with a big beam nailed on to Mawhinay's biiigo and partly on to his own, Tq, enable his horsoand cart to levered up the beam and removed it. Next day when plaintiff saw him and asked why ho removed the beam, witness •■ said he did it and would again. He did not uso tho. works imputed to him. Alex Mutrie deposed that he gave

permission to Maguiro to go through bis property, Mawhinay, to whom witness leased the bush, asked him l to stop ( Maguiro, which witness to do. Hk E. W. Porritt, assistant Clerk of HKue Court, said that he had seen the - bridges and the beam previously mentioned, Judging by the nail ■ marks he should say tho beam when nailed down overlapped Maguire's approach,. In the case of malicious injury to property the' bench dismissed the information without costs. With reference to tho application for sureties to keep tho peace, that also was dismissed, the Court considering the case a most trilling one. A BOW BEFORE BREAKFAST. Thomas A. Lyons v John Thomp- • son.—Cbargo of assault. Accused pleaded guilty with great provocation. Plaintiff deposed: Last Monday morning about six o'clock I was on the Opaki racecourse, Accused was also there, and Albert Hosking. tf&sking and myself were'having an TRercation when the accused advised Hosking to hit me on the head with a stone, I took no notice and went on with the argument, when accused came over and interfered. I told lrim it was none of his business and to go away and leave me alone. He

said he had been waiting for mo a I long time and had got me now. He i | took off his coat and waistcoat and told me to put up my bauds. I said, y " Thompson, I will not fight nor quarrel with you ; go away and let uie alone." With that ho spat in my face. I backed out of the road * and told him.lie was a gentleman, He made several feints to strike mo and the fourth time struck mo oii the face ana drew blood. With that 1 said, " Thiß is too much; you'vo got several friends herd and I am by myself," I stooped down aud picked up a boulder. 1 told him to go away quietly, if ho did not want to get in the hospital, Thompson picked up a small stick, when Hosking interfered and took him away. The wordy continued, and I told him [ Kd never struck a man in my life, Tud was not going to begin on him. I don't wi?h to press the charge'. The Bench: What do you mean? Do you wish to withdraw the chargo ? Witness; No, but i don't wish to press heavily on him. Defendant: You do your best for yourself, Lyons, Never mind about me, I can look after myself. Defendant on oath said: I was on the course at the time in question. Hosjcinsputout two horses on the , gallop to do their work. Tlieywjre up the straight when Lyons "sent out ahorse with his boy and told him to canter down the straight wtien iho horses came up, Hosting said it was a wrong thing to do, as it might lead to an accident, Borne words passed between them and 1 told Lyons! did not think it was a right thing to do. One word led to another, and I said to. Lyons " you kve been talking of me behind my ofc, now say it to my face." Lyons called mo a b liar, and 1 hit him with the palm of my hand, Lyons picked up a stone which be afterwards threw down, and after a few moro words wo each went our separate ways. , Plaintiff asked several questions \ through the Court. .For .the dofeuce, Albert Hosking deposed that ho was a jockey and trainer. Ho was working two of his horses on the morning in question, when Lyons sent his horse the opposite way to meet witness'. The'consequence was that one of the horses ran off against the rail He told Lyons that he was a d—fool, , Lyons tried to lay the blame on to the boy, witness said it was nothing of the sort as ho heard him tell the boy to go that way. Lyons said the Lboy had been spoilt .by Thompson, Vind the latter hearing the remark Sip up and some words .passed Ween them whon Lyons called Thompson ab— 1-—. Thompson pulled his coat off and told Lyons to shape. Thompson gave Mm a blow or a push in the face. Lyons then picked up a stone. That was the end of the assault. His Worship in giving judgment said it was evident an ill-feeling had existed between the parties before Monday last. Language on the occasion in question: had passed between them which was not of the choicest, When one-man calls another a liar there is somo excuse perhaps if iiiiho'heat of tho moment ne replies with a blow. But this was not'the case with Thompson who, before strikiug Lyons took oil his coat and waistcoat and challenged him|tojfight. He had therefore quite time to consider that it was wrong to strike him,' Under the circumstances he should inflict a penalty, but considering there was provocation it would be but a small ono. Accused would ba fined 5s and Court fl*s7s. ' - Your Worship I •Jbink you would bo doing its both good turn if you bound us over to ' keep, the peace towards each other for six months, I'm not afraid of him but I'm afraid of myself. His Worship said he had nothing before him to warrant that. He cautioned them then, however, that if they came beforo him age in he should severely punish them. He advised them to each go his separate way and keep clear of each other.. Thompson, on leaving the "dock, m&soitovocc; " Yes, I'll keep clear of him. His skin isn't wholesome." "It's not black, anyway," replied Lyons, and Thompson turned on him liko a tiger. He restrained himself, however, and appealed to the Court if that was not language calculated to provoke it breach of the peace. His Worship, who had evidently heard Lyons' remark, but not what led!iip to it, called' Lyons backhand severely'reprimanded him. Ly'piis appealed to Constable Salmon £a say whether Thompson had not , Ast'giv'eii provocatfq'i'v' to which.the ■ officer repljed ill the affjrinative. Uis Worship, in dismissing Lyons, said that no nuin'o color should be brought into question, That was not a reproach; it was his conduct ; ; that he was judged-by, After further • •Wcautioning both parties, tho' Court '.'• J&afljoumd, ,