R.M. COURT, HAMILTON.

Waikato Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1488, 17 January 1882, Page 3

R.M. COURT, HAMILTON.

Saturday.— (Before Messrs H. W. Northcroft, R.M., S. T. Secldon, Johu Knox and Capt. Steele, J.P.)

Threatened Suicide. —David Coombes whose eccentric conduct was specially alhuled to in last issue was charged with the above offence as also with being of unsound mind. The facts as detailed in last issue were stated by the police, and in further explanation it was added that the accused had lately given way to drink. He was remanded for examination the 19th inst. Alleged Cattle Stealing.— Grove Vowless was charged on remand with the theft of a heifer, the property of Mr P. Le Quesne. The principal evidence, which | was most voluminous, was that of Winter j Le Quesne, from which it appeared that in March last witness exchanged a bull calf for the heifer calf in dispute. In November he missed the heifer from its accustomed run, and did not see it again till he saw it in the police paddock. The cross-examination by Mr O'Neill went to prove that there were conditions attached to the exchange, the principal one being that piosecutor was bound to keep the heifer calf away from its mother, or 'ilse that the exchange would be null and void. Witness admitted the accused had frequently spoken to him about the calf getting back to its mother, and asked him to try and keep her away, but absolutely denied there were any conditions attached to the exchange except that prosecutor was to keep the bull calf for a fortnight. The next important witness was Walter Coop, who principally deposed to an alleged conversation between Winter Le Quesne and accused, in which accused said he would take back the heifer, as the conditions had not been fulfilled. C. Le Quesne, Jas. Quiun, Constable Murray, and other witnesses also gave evidence, but their testimony was somewhat contradictory. The prosecution was ably conducted by Sergeant McGovern, and the defence by Mr O'Neill was keen and protracted. Prisoner was duly committed for trial. Yesterday.— (Before Mr H. W. Northcroft, R.M.) ALLEGED CATTLK .STEALING. Grove Vowless was charged with stealing a white steer, the property of Mr Isaac Coates, in November last. Owing to the illness of Mr Hay, the prosecution was conducted by Sergeant McGovern. Mr O'Neill for the defence. The Court was occupied the whole of the day with the hearing of this case, and it is likely to occupy a large part of to-day. The first witness called was Mr Isaac Coates, the alleged owner of the beast in dispute, who deposed : The steer in the Court-house paddock belongs to me. It is unbrander'. and about 15 months old ; I know it by peculiar marks. Missed it at beginning of November or end of October. Its value is about £3 or £3 10s. Searched for it, and got the first trace of its whereaboujs from Mr Coop on the 9th day of December last, when I asked him if this beast was one of those he had bought from the accused. After some hesitation {which, the witness said, left a disiprceable impression upon bis mind), Coop told me he believed the beast was one of those which he had bought from Yowless and sold to Hiuton. On the 1 Ith (Sunday) had a conversation with Coop, and afterwards with Vowless. Our conversation was about three cows which I had lost, and which accused said he had been blamed for stealing. I replied, "I do not blame anyone till I have found them out." I spoke to him about the white steer, the animal in dispute, and in substance he answered that " it you can swear to it, I will either return it to you, or pay you for it." He said, " I thought it belonged to myself, as it had been running so long with my ' own cattle ; but if you say nothing about r it, I will return it to you in the morniug if it is yours." I said all right; all I want is to get my own cattle back again. The witness underwent a close crossexamination by Mr ONeill, by Sergeant McGovern, in re-examination, and by the Court, but nothing was elicited to shake the evidence for the prosecution. — The next witness was Mr Walter Coop, who corroborated the evidence for the prosecution in many instances ; but in the cross-examination and the re-examination by Sergeant McGovern, this witnesses' evidence seemed to break down, eliciting from the R.M. a severe rebuke. Mr Northcroft said that the witness should be considered an accomplice of thp accused, and that his evidence throughout tended to excuse the prisoner.— Mr Hinton was briefly examined as to the exchange of beasts between Coop and witness, and in this case also Mr Coop'a evidence was contradicted by the witness. — The Court then enquired at 4.30 p.m. how long the next witness' evidence would take, when Mr O'Neill stated that the cross-examination would take three or four hours. The case was then adjourned till 10 a.m. this day.