RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 465, 13 February 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Thursday, Feb. 11. (Before J. Giles, Esq., E.M.) ASSAULT ANDTHItEATENING LANGUAGE. Amelia Hayne was charged with assaulting and using threatening language towards Ann O'Donnell. Mr Tyler appeared for the complainant. The assault, he said, had not been one of an aggravated character, but, with the language used, it was part of a system of anuoyanee to prevent the recurrence of which it was necessary that the defendant should be bound over to keep the peace. Mrs O'Donnell stated that on Saturday Mr Tyler called at her houso. He was scarcely seated when a stone came on to the roof, and during the whole afternoon stones continued to be thrown. The defendant, whose house—the Royal Oak Hotel—was next door, was seen going to her front door, and picking up stones, and immediately afterwards stones came out of the Koyal Oak kitchen window, and on to the roof. Afterwards Mrs Hayne came to her back-door. She was told to go away, but pushed her way in, and endeavoured to push up the parlor door against Mrs O'Donnell, at the same time taking a broom from her, and saying " I will do away with you. You would only be like a straw in my hands." Mrs Kane, a neighbour, followed her into the house, and succeeded in getting her out, and in shutting the door. She (Mrs O'Donnell) was in fear of her own and her children's safety, and bore the defendant no malice. Mrs Kane corroborated this evidence. She saw stones com« out of the Royal Oak kitchen window, apparently thrown at the children, and she saw the defendant attempt to enter Mrs O'Donnell's house, and refusing to go away. Wna. O'Donnell, the complainant's son, was also called to corroborate the complaint. Mrs Hayne's statement was that, during her absence, her servant, Mary de Loree, had been annoyed by the complainant's children throwing stones on her roof, and as they continued to be thrown, some falling ou the windows, she went to ask Mrs O'Donnell to make them desist. As she went to the door, Mrs O'Donnell took up the broom, and knocked her hat off. She' had put up with a great deal, and would put up with more rather than come to the Court, but the complainant was actuated by malice and a desire to injure her. She called Mary de Loree, who gave a similar statement of the facts, a witness named Andrew Peterson, who proved nothing, and another witness named Brent, who had seen Mrs O'Donnell's children throw stones, and who heard the defendant repeatedly complain to Mrs O'Donnell, but Mrs O'Donnell only laughed at her. The Magistrate had difficulty in believing the evidence on either side, the story of the complainant being somewhat improbable, as well as statements on the side of the defendant. At any rate, the case was not a very aggravated one, but, from the number of cases in which she appeared, and her natural disposition, he feared the defendant was in fault. If the complainant's children were in fault she should have taken another remedy than seeking an

altercation. The charge of assault he would dismiss. With regard to the other charge, the complainant swore that she was in bodily fear, and he would require the defendant to find one security of £25 to keep the peace for three months, and to pay the Court fees. Mr Hayne offered his security, which was accepted, and the court fees were paid. Fktday, Feb. 12. Charles Duff, for having been drunk and incapable, was fiued 10s. THREATENING LANGUAGE. David Murdoch was charged, on the information of James L. Phelps, with using towards him the threatening words "You bloody hound, I will punch your bloody head," and with other conduct, inconsequence of which the complainant was in fear of bodily injury. James L. Phelps : On Tuesday evening between nine and ten o'clock, as I was passing Sheahan's Hotel, I met Mr Norman, of Giles Terrace. At his invitation I went in, and sat down in the little parlor between the bar and the dance-room. "We sat there for some little time, talking exclusively about mining matters. While we were sitting there, the defendant came out of the dance-room in a very excited state, looking very fierce, and came to me, and said " Did you lay these women on to me?" He lifted his hand to strike me. I made as if to avoid him, and told him he bad better not do so. He muttered something, and left the room. We continued our conversation, and, in the course of a few minutes we heard angry words and quarrelling in the dance-room. A few minutes afterwards, the defendant came again into tbe room, followed by several women. He asked the same question again, lifted his hand, and made use of the words which I have sworn to in the information. I saw he was trying to draw me into a fight, and I desired to avoid it. I saw nothing more of the defendant until I was leaving Sheahan's about twelve. On going out I met some persons on the pathway. They held me in conversation, as if intentionally planned, when the defendant rushed towards me. He commenced to abusfi me, calliug me by the same words as those I have stated before. He lifted his hands to strike me, but did not do so. He then laid his head on his chest and " butted " me. Seeing that he wanted to raise a disturbance, I went inside. When the neighbourhood was clear, I went over to the Camp, and asked to be allowed to lay an information. I was told to come on the following day, and I laid the information. I went home in company with Detective Lambert. By Mr Pitt: The defendant said " Did you lay these women on to me P" I know the women by repute. Their names are Polly Parsons and Annie Brown. I had not been in their company. I saw one of the girls throw a tumbler at the defendant. I heard them abusing each other. It was not in reference to that that he asked me if I had laid these women on to him. I believe one of them is in the habit of annoying him. I do not live at the house where they reside. Perhaps, Mr Pitt, you will be kind enough to ask me where I do live ? The defendant has often told me that I urged these women to annoy him. Ido not know of any circumstances which should lead to us being bad friends. I may have attributed my leaving Morey's to defendant, but I do not remember having expressed it. The words used were that he " would punch my head." Several times foe threatened me. I never had a quarrel with him, but he has had with me, and within the last few months he has three times threatened to strike me. By the Bench : [ am positively in fear of bodily injury from the defendant. One Norman was called as a witness, and the complainant explained that he was his principal witness, but he did not appear. Timothy Sheahan. I remember seeing you on Monday nigbt last. I did not see you misconduct yourself, or take part in a quarrel. I assisted, with others, to put the defendant out of my house. By tbe Magistrate (who had some difficulty in getting the defendant to put his questions in proper legal form): Phelps went out, and returned again. He appeared excited. 1 asked what was the matter. He said they were going to thrash him, and I told him to remain inside. By the complainant: I judged from your excited manner and pale appearance, that there was something unpleasant between you and them. James Jenkins: I did not see the defendant try to strike you. I saw him lay his head and make one rush towards you, and you ran away. He said " Phelps, I believe you laid these women on to me. If I thought you did I would punch your head." lam a friend ot the defendant There may have been some other words, but 1 do not recollect them. By Mr Pitt: The complainant told me it was through Murdoch be had left Morey's. He did not exactly appear to bo on friendly terms with Murdoch. Joseph Nixon : I did not hear you make use of any bad language. I did not hear or see any altercation in the room. I saw the defendant go into the room. There was a squabble, but Ido not know what it was about. I saw the defendant's hand lifted up, but whether it was towards " the ladies " or not I do not know.

By Mr Pitt : There was a disturbance about -' the ladies." The complainant asked leave to put a question to the defendant. Mr Pitt did not object, but he argued that the application was irregular, and must not be held as a precedent. The Magistrate thought there was precedent sufficient to entitle him to allow the application. The defendant was called, and, in reply to the complainant, said : I could not say whether I lifted my hand to you or not. I was so excited that I did not know what I was doing. To the Court: I was standing in Sheahan's. Two girls, friends of Phelps, came there and commenced to blackguard me. This was the third time they had done so, and I blamed him for urging them to annoy me. By Mr Pitt: It was the third time I had been attacked by these girls. On one occasion be was in their house in Freeman street, when they were abusing me. I asked him if he laid them on, but I did not want to interfere with him. That was the cause of my being excited. Mr Pitt contended that, from the complainant's own showing, this was not a case in which the defendant could be bound over to keep the peace. Supposing the throat had been made, on the evidence of the complainant himself there was not sufficient grounds for the case. The threats must be definite, not contingent or uncertain, and the only evidence here was that if Murdoch thought that Phelps had set these women on him, he would " punch his head." Detective Lambert, called by the defendant: I know the complainant and defendant. I know the women whose names have been mentioned. I have seen Phelps frequently go into their house in Freeman street, and the other day I went there to caution them with regard to a complaint Murdoch had made against them. Phelps was there then. I could not see him, but I could hear him laughing and speaking in one of the bedrooms. I cautioned them in his hearing. They made no statement why they did this. I spoke to the complainant on the same evening, I think. He told me of the circumstances, and asked me what to do. I told him the better way was to summons Murdoch. He told me Murdoch had got him out of a comfortable home, and he was now stopping in this house, known as the Robert Burns Hotel. By the complainant: I did not see you in the house of Polly Parsons. I was walking up the passage from the back-door, and all the bed-room doors were open except the one from which I heard your voice. I know very nearly the voices of all the old residents in the town. It is not unusual to hear sounds of laughing and voices in these houses at night. This was in the middle of the day. The complainant: Is it not a usual thing for men of very good position in the town, and even for men wearing her Majesty's livery, to be In these houses ? Detective Lambert: I think it is very unusual. The Magistrate said this affair seemed to have arisen out of some quarrel, the particulars of which had not been gone into. Like most of those matters, it was probably not very creditabble to either of the parties. All he had to consider was whether he should be justified in binding the defendant over to keep the peace. The ground of defence was that the threat was contingent, but that was not sufficient in all cases, and the manner in which this threat had been made did not entitle the defendant to exemption. He had certainly threatened the complainant with his fist and otherwise. At the same time it was not a serious case. He would require the defendant to enter into his own recognisances to keep the peace for three months. The complainant applied for allowances for witnesses, but the Magistrate considered it was not a case for witnesses' expenses.