BRIGHTON.

Westport Times, Volume V, Issue 776, 14 February 1871, Page 2

BRIGHTON.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT. Satubday, February 11. (Before Chas. Broad, Esq , R.M.) Meers v. Burke, for an assault. Mr Bickerton Fisher appeared for the complainant, and Mr Shapter for defendant. This, as well as the rest of the cases set down and heard, to-day; was the result of some party feeling which cropped out at Brighton on the occasion of the late election. The plan-tiff, upon being sworn and examined by Mr Either stated that he knew nothing about it himself, but was told afterwards that defendant had thrown a stone at him with intent to commit an assault. A multitude of witnesses were then called for the prosecution, no two of whom agreed in their evidence. Mr Shapter made a very forcible address to the bench on behalf of defendant, pointing out the variances iu the testimony of the several witnesses for the complainant, and concluded by calling various witnesses, who, if their evidence is to bo believed, proved conclusively that defendant had not raised a stone that day. Seawright v. Burke and thirteen others, Mr Fisher for complainant, Mr Shapter for defendant. A multitude of witnesses were called for the complainant, from whose testimony we gathered that plaintiff was proceeding down Main street with a two horse dray, containing a fiddler and a red, white and blue Hag, with " Vote for Donne" in the centre. That defendant attacked the dray and tore down the flag. That plaintiff attempted to defend his property and in doing so was grossly assaulted, and only saved himself by fighting his way through the crowd, and escaping to his house. Mr Shapter called several witnesses for the defence, who exonerated several parties charged from all participation in the affray, and the Magistrate accordingly discharged them. Burke was fined £5, and bound over in two sureties of £25 each, and himself in £SO, to keep the peace towards all her Majesty's subjects for six months The rest were fined in greater or less amounts, according as the evidence demonstrated their activity in the matter.

His Worship, in giving judgment read the whole constituency a very severe lesson upon the impropriety and illegality of making any display of party emblems or feeling at elections, and boped this would be the first and last occasion upon which he would have to preside at such an investigation. Seawright v. Nevin, Noonan and Burke.—This was an information for an indictable offence, in that the defendants, on Saturday last, did unlawfully and maliciously pull down and destroy a certain lamp, fixed over the door of complainant's public house, in Main-street, Brighton. Mr Fisher appeared for complainant and Mr Shapter for defendants. Complainant, called by Mr Fisher, deposed that on Saturday last a rope was suspended from his house across the street, and attached to one opposite, a red, white, and blue flag being suspended from the centre, with the words '• Vote for Donne " painted in black letters on a white centre piece. That the rope was cut on the opposite side of the street, and the flag brought to ' the ground, where it was seized upon by the crowd. The defendants, with others unknown, hung on to the rope for the purpose of pulling it down from his house; that the rope got entangled in the lamp, that defendants still continued hauling, and eventually pulled the lamp out of its socket, and smashed it. He valued the lamp at £lO. Several wicnesses corroborated the complainant's statement. Mr Shapter declined to call any witnesses, aud said his Worship must either dismiss the case or send defendants for trial. His Worship decided that there was not sufficient evidence of malice and dismissed the case. Seawright v. Nevin and others. Civil case to recover £7 10s, value of a Bag, whip, and cap, taken or destroyed by defendants on the occasion of the late row. Mr Fisher for plaintiff. Mr Shapter for defendants. Mr Fisher applied for, and obtained, leave to amend summons by striking out Nevin's name, and the whip and cap with which plaintiff eharged him on the ground that a separate action ought to have been brought against each. Leave was granted and judgment entered for £4—proved value of flag, and costs. B. Kreutzmeyer v. M'Carthy. This was an information, against the sergeant in charge of the district, for assault and false imprisonment. Mr Fisher appeared for complainant. The Magistrate said he had been subpoenaed as a witness in the case, so he should adjourn same for 14 days, when, he had no doubt, Dr Giles would be in attendance and adjudicate upon it.