HAMILTON R M COURT. Thursday, June 8th, 1876. (Before W. N. Searancke, Esq., R. M.

Waikato Times, Volume X, Issue 633, 10 June 1876, Page 2

HAMILTON R M COURT . Thursday, June Bth, 1876. (Before W. N. Searancke, Esq., R. M.

( alm:ci:d assauit. William Kiple\, watchmaker, of Hamilton, was charged \v George Ncalo, livery s'ttble-koopei of the .same place, thai he did unlawfully assault the complainant, by striking him with his clenched list, on the light cheek. The same defendant was also-cbarged by the complainant with having, on the 10th of May l.vst, used "provoking and insulting language, viz., ' You are a liar and a thief.' for the put pose of annoyance •uid piovoeation, and that such conduct in likely to be repeated, and is calculated to piovoke a bleach of the peace." Mr Hay appeared lor compli'm-int. The accused, who wab undefended, pleaded not guilty. The following evidence was adduced : George Neale- deposed : On or about Friday, 22nd May last, I received a bill from liipley for cash lent, 5s ; 1 cwt potatoes, 75.; and pumpkin, 2s. I went orer to see him, and told Ripley that the boot, was on the other leg, as he owed me balance of account, for six loads of manure delivered, 21s. Defendant aaid heonly received two loads, and ,1 was '"a liar." I warned him to be careful, when he replied, " You are not only a liar, but you are a thief." I said, " You old scamp, it >ou were not au old maui should be compelled to strike you. 11 Defendant then struck me on the right cheek, and ran behind the counter. He said, " I will have you up befure Se.uuneke," aud 1 thought it bebt to retire without further provocation. Defendant's daughter aud a young man were present at the time. By defendant: It was Friday evening. It wae on the 19th instead of the 22ud. Defendant : " It's a made up tale." The Bench «hewj dismissed the case on account of an informality -in the information. Mr Hay explained that be had not seen the iuformivtiouiantil he entered the Court that morning-.

ALLhGED ABUSIVE LANGUAGE. The second .charge was then proceeded with. The defendant again pleaded not guilty. Complainant gave evidence similar .to previous case. He considered that the language used was provoking, Annoying, and calculated to provoke a breach ot tiie peace. By defendant : I did .not say " What the devil do yon mean" when 1 §poke to 1 you about my Account. Defendant.: " I deny the language imputed to me by Goorg« Nettle, and 1 deny the striking." Hugh Desy : I was recently working as labourer for Mr Itipley in his gardeuKemomber the lUth of May last. Delivered a bill from Mi ftipley on that dato to Mr Neale. Neale looked at the bill, •met said, " What the h — does he mean,' and went across coMUther liipley's. " You ovid sc imp," S'yf. he, "■ what the devil do you maneJ" " Git out of me shop," bays Misther Kiploy. " I won't," says iMiether Nea-le. "" Y oil ai c a liar," sa} s Mis' her itii*ley. Kipley stiuck at iNeulu and .Ntalo at Itipley, and faith I was neatly gertmg u blow mytelf between the two of 'em. Kipley dul not run behind the counter ui> 3oon as the scuffle was over. By defendant ; Neale struck at Hipley first. Neale had his tisls clenched before Kipley said anything insuhing to Moale. So blows were actually struck. When Neule s,.oke of six loads of mauure, Riploy c.ilM Ne.il<s a " liar and a thief." " (iit out. of my shop," says Mi&ther Kipley. This concluded the c>ise. Tiie Bench diainuaed the charge, each [>arty te pay his own co->ts.

Civil Sldk. Several petty debt (uses were heard, but none ut any public interest. The Court then adjourned.