R. M. Court. (Saturday.—Befor H. W. Northcroft, Esq, R.M)

Waikato Times, Volume XVI, Issue 1350, 24 February 1881, Page 3

R. M. Court. (Saturday.— Befor H. W. Northcroft, Esq, R.M)

Assault. — Arthur C. Joslin, Plaintiff v. Edvv.nd Gai nwnswuy, Detendent. M.Greaham appealed for plaintiff, who bcinjj eworn d^po ed : I am a shoemaker, rebidiugf in Alpxanilra. I n collect Monday, the 31st January : about a quarter to 2 o'oloik, that niffht I was in compiny of the defendant's lister, JSli s McCounachie. It was dark while pining by B"iidick't> place ; the defendant stepped out from under the poplar trees, parsed rouud Mrs. MoCounachie, and canie up between v->, pushing rae on one aide. t then stepped round to tho other side of Mrs McCounachie, when the defendant at once struck mo in the face under the eye, no word 3 had previously pasced between us what. erev. Defendant Haid, "if you can't take * hint, take that you ." His sister then said, " Ned, what did you do that for ?" defendant replied, " He knows what it is for.'' I wild. " I fehould feel obliged if he would inform me of his reasons for striking 1 me." He »aid, " you have crossed my path, po look out, or I will break your head." I havo never to my knowledge, done anything by wjrd or deed, t~> cause him to strike me : he had no provocation whatever. To Defendant : I did not say, or either of uh, " hero comes Ned.' I did not hear you tell Mrs Mi Connachie her mother was waiting- for her to go to bed ; there was not a woid spoken. To Ul3 Court: I was returning home with Mrs McConn i'-hio, I .im nut. eniraar^d to her, but I think I had the right to do «<• an an acquaint <incp without reference to her brother's feelings on the nritt<T —Mr Greshim : I would remind the Court that the defendant's sister is no inexperienced younjr girl, but a widow these last thiee years, and perfectly able to look out tor herself. — Mr Northcroft thought it right that bisters shonld be under tho supervision of their brothers. — Witness' examination by the Court continued : Defendant did not discolour my eye. I could nee n» mark wi*h the aid of a looking-glans. When defendant came up between us I did not think it was a hint that be objected to my being 1 in his sister* company. — Mrs Ltetitia McConnachie, aworn, and examined by Mr Gresham, gave corroborative evidence. — Examined by the Court : Ido not think my brother haa any right of supervision over me. Mr Joslin did not come round on my side when my brother came between us. We all stood still. 1 should say it was a lie if anyone said po. I did not hear, bin. saw, the blow. — Edward Garmonsway, the defendant, stated : On the night of the 31st I was over the river, where my mother resides. My mother asked me to go and sco where my sister was, as it was time for her to be at home, and she did not ■want to sit up for her any longer. I went over to my brother's house, and found she was not there. I then went out and met my sifter and Joshn. I heard one of them say, "Here comes Ned." I spoke to my sister, telling her it was time to go home, and that she had no business to be out at that time of niffhe. I went between them, and plaintiff pushed against me. Then I pushed him away, as u hint his company waa no longer required. Had I struck him, I certainly thiuk I would have left tho mark of my fist on hi* face. It was a ,-trivial affair altogether to trouble the j^Court with. He only wished the plaintiff t&-know that he (defendant) disapproved of his walking out late at ni"ht with his sister, and keeping her mother out of hed. He thought the plaintiff and his sister did not want his company. (Laughter).— The Court : The old saying, you know, "Two are company — three none." — The Court dismissed the case, there beingf a discrepancy in the evidence of Mrs Mc« 'onnoohie and the plaintiff, and considered that the interference of the defendant under the circumstances wax justifiable. Bendick v. Sohofiekd. — Debt, £1 14«. No appearance of defendant. 'Judgment for fall amount, with I 7« posts. This concluded the business. — [Correspondent, Feb. 21.]

Fbom an editorial appearing in the Southland Times of the sth instant, we gather that the noisily hostile demonstration recently made there agaimt the Cabinet Ministers visiting the town on official business, was pnrely and solely prompted and fomented by an insignificant looal clique, and was by no means shared in or ©Ten countenanced by the bulk of the community. Indeed, the amenities and good fellowship displayed at the banquet given in the evening to the Hons. Major Atkinson and Mr. Oliver proved this. It may bs mentioned in connection with this matter that at Rivarton the Ministers received a most hearty reception. A crowd gathered to greet tHpm with every demonstration of respect and ourdiulity ) they were escoifwd to their hotel by the principal inhabitants of the place, and a band of music played during the "evening."" "'"The "inVercargiU demonstration was evidently, to put it mildly, an eccentricity of no political importance. . To perpetrate a puu of local application, the, promoters of the row were bo muoh overcome with their exertions that they have /eft weak ever eiooe, '