RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURT, WESTPORT.

Westport Times, Volume II, Issue 203, 25 March 1868, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURT, WESTPORT.

(Before J. Giles, Esq., M.D., R.M.) Tuesday, March 21. IAROENY. Charles Sihbei'i/ was brought up in custody, charged with stealing a locket and chain, and with a vagrant. Lydia Collins, a married woman residing in Westport, deposed—On St. Patrick's Day I saw the prisoner. I had a locket and chain in my hand ; he said it wanted to bo mended, and he would get it done for me. I did not authorise Sibbery to sell the articles. The locket and chain produced are my property. They were not taken from me agaiust my will. Isabella Macpherson said—l know the prisoner. On Saturday afternoon he came to my house and asked for Mrs Collins, who was stopping with me. I told him she was out. A fterwards Mrs Collins came in, when I told her prisoner had been to see her, when we had a conversation about the locket. She told me he had taken the locket from her, and said that she meant to see about getting it from prisoner. I afterwards saw Sergeant Williams, when I repeated the above conversation to him, and told him that Mrs Collins was determined to lay an information agaiust the prisoner for stealing her locket and chain. Kate Kent, sworn—Some three or four days ago prisoner came to a house where 1 Was stopping, and showed me a locket aud chain. Some girl present said to him, you might make Kate a present of the articles. He went away, but afterwards came back and told me that he had left the locket and chain at Turner's, the watchmakers, and if I liked to pay for the mending of them I was welcome to them. I went to Turner's, paid for the mending, and obtained possession of the goods. Sergeat Williams deposed Erom information I reeeived I went to Kate Kent's house, to enquire after a locket and chain. She told me what she has now told the Court, and gave them to me. I afterwards arrested the prisoner on suspicion of stealing the locket. By the prisoner—When I ams'ed you it was 6 p.m. I had seen you previously, between one and two o'clock I had a conversation wiih you abouttho locket and chain. You told me yon knew all about them, and that you ha 1 got them from a young lady; yon offered to go with me to her house. The Magistrate said the evidence was not sufficient to sustain a charge of stealing, as the owner of the articles had sworn that prisoner had taken them from her with her consent; he therefore d's nissed the charge. JOHN SCOTT V. ALEXANDER PATRICK. The piaintiff was represented by Mr Tyler. The defendant did not appear, and consequently judgment was given for plaintiff for amount and costs. JOHN SCOTT V. THOMAS HEWDNEY. The plaintiff was represented bv Mr Tyler. Plaintiff sued defendant for amount of tolls due him, as proprietor of a registered track to the Caledonian, for passage of defendant's horses, cattle, aud sheep. On plaintiff being put into the box, the following was elicited in crossexamination by Thomas Dewdn y, defendant. I have no partner in the track. Mr Ehrenfried has no interest in it. Ido not know whether the en trance to the track is through property belonging to the Maories. I consider the track pas«able for cattle and horses. I cannot say whether it is passable for sheep. When I cut the track, for which I have protection—the track I took was partly through an old blazed line. I have kuow the Caledonian Terrace for ten months. I have generally travelled on the track for which 1 am now charging toll. I know of no other track to the Caledonian, except the one by way of the German Teraace. The twenty two sheep I charge you with passed over my track.

Thomas Dewdney, examined by MiTyler, admitted the passage of his sheep and cattle over plaintiff's track. This closed the case for the prosecution. Defendant called— Malcolm Stevenson, who said—l am a packer. I have known the Caledonian Terrace for nine months. I found a blazed track when I first went there. I widened the track I found, and got my loaded pack-horses through. No other track leads to the Caledonian except the one belonging to Scott, and my own by way of the German Terrace. T. A. S. Kynnersley, sworn, said- I remember a written applicatieu beingmade by Mr Scott, for protection to a track to the Caledonian. I do not remember whether a particular line was pointed out. At the first rush to the Terrace I had a track blazed ; two men cut it in four dayt. I would have granted protection for a track to Scott oven supposing it were on the old

blazed Government one, if lie had put it into proper repair. I consider the track better than nino thentlis of the bash tracks on the Coast, and I believe sheep could travel, but this is merely an opinion. I only know of two tracks to the Caledonian ; tho one in dispute, and Stcvensons by way of the German Terrace. The defendant then said—That ho did object to paying for the passage of his stock over an old blazed track, claimed by plaintiff as his property, but did not raise any ohjeetion to paying for passage over any Hear track, which had been cut by plaintiff, He said he had been in the habit of driving sheep, &c, over the track now protected, and owned by Scott for the last nine months ; and ho considered it a great hardship that a track made by diggers, blazed by government, and widened by private individuals, and belonging by right of usage to the public, should he protected; aud he protested against having to pay toll on such track. The Magistrate said, if I had stopped the line of defence adopted by the defendant at the outset I shoukf have been right, but as he was unrepresented by counsel I thought it was better to hear what defence he wished to set up, more especially as the subject is one of great public interest. The defendant has tried to prove that the track is not in good repair. Some time ago, at a former trial, this liue of defence was not considered sullicient to upset the evidence of the plaintiff, and the same reasoning will hold good now. The defendant's second line of defence—that the track was not cut by plaintiff, but was only an adaptation of an old blazed government track —is not a question for this Court to decide ; and if the defendant has a wish to upset the plaintiff's right to protection he can only do it by applying te the Superintendent to upset the grant of protection ; and in the meanwhile, until such track is not protected by Superintendent's grant, the charge must hold good. I, therefore, give judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed and costs ; and as the defendant has given notice of appeal, and as I have decided the case on a point of law, and not on justice, I shall allow an appeal to be made, provided the defendant takes the proper steps to bring the matter before the Court. Several debt cases, of no public interest, then occupied the Court for some considerable time. The Court was ultimately adjourned until 10 a.m. this day.