SPORTING. Cambridge Spring Meeting.

Waikato Times, Volume XVII, Issue 1436, 15 September 1881, Page 3

SPORTING. Cambridge Spring Meeting.

[by eleotbic telegraph, own correspondent.] , r .Auckland, Last Night. The following weights have been declared for the above races :—: — „ SPRING HAKTDIGAP. i < st. lb. st.lb. King Quail ..go Rauenafa ... 7 o Redeemer ... 8 o Gilderoy ... 7 o Grand Duchess 8 o Slander filly ... 6>o Maori ... ... 7 12 Stanley ... 6 7 Rocket ... 7 5 STEEPLECHASE. st.lb. st.lb. Sportsman ... it 1 Harkaway ... 10 10 Matau.. ... ix 7 Doric ... ... 10 4 HURDLES. st.lb. I st.lb. Matau... ... n 12 | Rawenata .. 10 5 Harkaway ... n o I Derrick ... 10 o Sportsman ... 10 to | W. PekcivAl, Handicapper. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HAMILTON. _9* Tjhtbsday. — ( Before H. W. Northoroft, Esq., R M., and His Worship the Mayor.) Alleged Rape. Lawbenck Hayes on remand, was charged with having on the 9th inst. committed a rape on one Margaret Gordon, a married woman, residing in Hamilton East. Sergt. McGovern conducted the prosecution, and the accused, who denied the charge, was defended by Mr W. M. Hay. The evidence of the prosecutrix was to the effect that the accused, with whom witness and her husbaud were on the mo-t friendly terms, called afe her house on the evening of the 9th, hor husband being away in tha country at work. After inquiring if she was in want of anything, and being informed that she waif short of some articles of grocery, accused gave the witness a florin, which she told him she would repay as soon as she got her husband's money. He then went und sat down beside her and tried to take liberties with her, but she repulsed him, and hearing the dog bark went to the front door to see if anybody was there. After satisfying herself that no one was at the door, she closed it, and turned to go back to the kitchen, but the accused, who had followed her, caught hold of her, and despite all the resistance she could offer dragged her into one of the bedrooraa and committed the offence. Articles of clothing alleged to have been torn in the struggle were produced. When aocused was leaving she told him she would have him punished for what he had done. Her husband returned the next evening, (Saturday) but she had not the courage to tell him of the occurrence until the next morning, and later in the day they informed the polioe,by whom the acensed was arrested. In cross-examination, witness said she was not now sorry this action had been brought against the accused. She had been married nearly three years, and during that time had never been guilty of unfaithfulness. She kept a boardinghouse, but no improprieties had ever taken place between the lodgers and herself. Her husband had never accused her of having acted improperly. She had been charged before that Court once with drunkenness. Hayes had en a previous occasion lent her 15s, which she had not yet repaid as accused told her he was in no hurry for tha money. Witness di not scream when accused oaught hold of her, but she spoke loud enough to be heard in the next house, the occupants of which she afterwards discovered were unfortunately out on Friday evening. Accused had been in the habit of acting very familiarly towards her, but on a previous occasion she had successfully repulsed him, and she thought she was able to do so again without invoking assistance. She. however, never thought he would have gone so far as he did. She most emphatically denied that she was a consenting party. John Gordon, the husband of the previous witness, deposed to having been informed of the occurrence on Sunday morning. At his wife's request he put off seeing the prisoner till the afternoon when he had cooled down a little. When he met the accused the latter became greatly excited as though he knew the nature of witness' errand. On witness accusing him of the offence H.iyes denied all knowledge of it. Witness afterwards communicated with the police. In cro!?8-examination the witness said he had never had occasion to s i iy anything against his wife's character. Accused had always been a good neigh - hour aod was the last man in the world he would have suspected of such an offence. He remembered , having once enquired of a lawyer the ooßt of Retting a divorce, but he had never told anyone that he had made a mistake in marrying the prosecutrii. He had threatened that if the accused was not committed for trial he would make small pieces of him, but he did not mean what he said. Many a man might say things under the influence of passion which he did not mean. The evidence of Constable Wild was taken as to the arrest of the accused. The witness, in answer t» accused's oouneel.said Mrs Gordon was regarded by the police as a person who had been convicted of disorderly conduct, but he could not say that he knew very much about her. Accused had always, so far as witness knew, borne the reputation of being a respectable man. This was the case for the prosecution. Mr Hay, in addrrssing tho Benoh for the defence, dwelt upon the fact that the prosecutrix's testimony was wholly unsupported by any other witness. What the husband had said amounted to absolutely nothing. The evidence of the garments was also valueless, because having been in the woman's possession it was possible for her to have treated them in any way which might seem to her' to give force to her statements. It was his firm belief that much of the evidence had been manufactured for the occasion. No one else was present when the offence was alleged to have been committed, and of course^his client's mouth was closed. He criticised the evidence of the prosecutrix at some length, and submitted that.it was not the kind one would expect to hear from a virtuous woman. ■He quoted from Johnson to show that the unsupported testimony of a witness, especially in cases of alleged rape, should be received with great caution. He submitted that there was not sufficient eridepce to send the case to a jury. The Bench were of opinion that a prima facie case had so far been made out, and unless the defence could succeed in injuring tho credibility of the prosecutrix's evidence they would be , bound to, send the ease' to the Supreme Court;. * Mr Hay .after consulting with his client, asked for a further reihahd till Friday, which was granted. ' ' ' ' Accused Was liberated on bail in two sureties of £200 each and 'himself in £250.

A ■WohjLk fch Brs'dfor'd 'rettirhed father home after a short absence to find the house shut up ia front and the blinds drawn. Her little daughter wai playing ttofc her cIqU b«d just expired..