POLICE COURT.

Waikato Times, Volume XII, Issue 948, 20 July 1878, Page 2

POLICE COURT.

Friday. (Before Captain Macpherson J.P. (Chairman,) T. S. SeJilon, Esq., J.P. and I. E. Vialou, Esq., J.P. ASSAULT. C. B. Buale, surgeon was charge" 1 with assaulting T. C. Hammond on Thursday, the iS.fch iust. by refusing to leave the promises of informant when requested to do no, and offering vioie/t iTsistauce when ejected. Mr Hesketh appearprl for dotendant. Mr McGregor Hay for the informant. Mr tleskelli pleaded not guilty, and if the assault were provoked, justification and lawful excuse. In stating the case, Mr Hay said it was well known that on Thursday Dr Peale came into tho shop, Mr Hammond asked Dr Beale what he wanted. The reply was iv a disagreeable tone that he was a blackguard or words to that oflect. Informant called iv a police constable, and tellin? defendant, who refused to leave, that ho would use just such violence as was neoosary to do so, proceeded to put him out defendant grappled with iuforrnant, and resisted thereby committing the assault, and damaging part of tin stock m tho shop. E. J. Wright, deposed — I am a chemist and druggist m charge of Mr Hammond's chemist and drus^i'sl shop m Hamilton. No other person has charge over ohc shop but myself. No one to my knowledge has assorted any charge over the shop. I. am responsible 'x> Mr Hunmoud. Tho articles iv the shop belong to him. T. O. Hammond, tho informant, sworn, said [ am a stationer and also carrying on the business , of a chemist and druggist iv ITaniil- | ton. Yesterday morning; .1. was iii my chemists shop about halfpa.st 10 o clock. I was behind the j o-Minlor when defeu hint entered. Hu Hal. down m front of the counte* 1 . • I asked him wh it ho wanted? ho said I don't want you. I said wh-.vt is

there iv my shop you rlo want ? He said, youv shop ! This is my shop. What aro you doing here you blackguard ? I then culled m Constable Haddock. I said to ilia constable-, I watib you, to witness what fcako-3 place here. I then said,Mr JJoale, I order you to loavo theso promisfs. Ho said I'll not go. I then avid, j shall have to use suflicieub t'oi'co to 'make you go, I hope a little will .suffice. I took him with two Hngors by tho sleeve of the co it to lead him out. He jti'upel at and gu.ippled witli me round the neck' aned voleutly re-sis-ted. In the scuftio two bottles got broken, and being afraid of further claoiiio-o- 1 gave lniu in.ciiarge for an. assault. I l-cntcd the shop, from Dv Bale. 'J am m possession of it. iMr": . Wrijjhf, ■ previous witness, is employed by me. No one b tfc myself has the slightest interest m the business To All- rTeskoth : I hold the ah'op on a rent of £30 a yeir. Ml- rlesketh asked, " Uudor what authority do you hold possisnou of the promises "?. The Bench asked if by this it it was intended to raise- the question of title. Mr ITeskoth said, that Avas his intention, His client was the real possessor, and the Court had really uo jurisdiction. Mr Hay contended the question of title was not yet raise. J and quoted authorities arguing that the mere question put did not raise the question of title. It would need to be shown that the title was disputed It was necessary that the best evidence should be shown that defendant had a title, not us now, the mere aseition that ifc was so. In auswev to the question, complaiuant said : I have not a lease, I decline to -sa te on what terms I hold the premises : well, I am n yearly tenant paying rent quarterly ; after three yee.iM I was to pay au additional rental under certain conditions. 1 have been responsible for rent since the 18ih of last May. I gave defendant the us 3 of a consulting voovn free of rent. I gave liim tho use of the room as a matter of courtesy. The use of the room was nob part of the terms of my occupation. Jt was intended I should have a lease. Accordiug to the terms of the proposed lease I was to pay £'30 a year, and give Dr Beale ths use of a room as a consulting room. I had unploasantuess with defendant previously on account of his statingj that he was interested m the business, and 'because he insulted and auuoyed customers coming to the shop, and that his general conduct was ruining the business. Ihal no other reasons. Re-cxamiuod : I did not take the promises under lease as the lease was not completed. I hold them on the terms just stated by me. The assault tool: place not m the consulting- room but iv the shop. John Haddock, constable m the Constabulary deposed, to being 1 called by infoi'mant bo come into Ids shop at about half-past ten on Thursday morning. His name is over the door. I saw informant approach defendant ami take him gently by the coat sleeve saying he should use no more force than was necessary. Defendant jumped up and seized informant by the neck or shoulders. They both struggled on t/ie floor of the shop, endeavoriug to worst one another, and "f oil over against the counter. I separated them. Mr Hammond then requested me to take Dr Beale into custody on the charge of assault. I did so, and took him to tlic station. To Mr Hesketh :. Dr Beale when at tho station, requested mo to arruafc informant. On Wednesday evening Dr Beale told me to inform Sergb. McGroveru he iatende I to take possession of the premises at 10 o'clock next morning under legal advicj. Re-examined : 1 did, not take informant m charge, because it suemed to me that defendant was the aggressor. John Kno x, sto i\j keeper, of Hamilton, gave similar evidence with respect to the assault and arrest. Tdis closed the case for the informant. Mr llosketk m opening the case stubul that he sbou'd prove, informant hud uo tide to the premises, and asked whether the Court would accept his assurance that this was so — as a bar to jurisdiction Mr Hay contended that some ground must bo shown. Defendant's counsel might be acting iv good faith, but wrongly instructed. Mr Hesketh stated he had not the title deeds at hand. The Court considered that the assault had been proved, bub was of so trilling a nature that it dismissed the case, each party paying his own costs.