RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HAMILTON.

Waikato Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1600, 5 October 1882, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE 'S COURT, HAMILTON.

Yesterday. — (liefore Mr Northcroft, R.M.) Assault. J. A. Douglas was charged with having assaulted one James T. Gamp, landlord of the Tamahere hotel, on the 19th September, by striking him in the face with his fist, &c. , &c. There were four other informations, chaining defendant with malicious damage to property by ' breaking sundry glasses and lemonade bottles, &c, challenging informant to fight, using threatening language, and refusing to leave the hotel when requested. Mr W. M. Hay appeared for the prosecution, and Mr James Russell (Auckland), who appeared for defendant pleaded guilty to the several charges. The evidence of the informant went to show that on the day named Mr Douglas drove up to the hotel, and, entering! the bar, btruck witness in the face twice without giving any warning, applying suudry epithets to him at the same time. After committing the assault defendant cooled down, and confessed that he might have acted hastily, but as he felt he must "sail" for somebody, he hit witness. Witness gave no provocation whatever. He asked Mr Douglas for an apology, and defendant replied by challenging him to fight. In cross-examination, witness said a man named Hall had been brought to the hotel by Mr Douglas, and had gone away without paying. Had never received any melons from Hall in part payment of board, but got them as presents. Got the melons long before Hall went to stay at the hotel. Mr Douglas was sober when he committed the assault. Re-examined : Got the melons in February, 1881. Got them from Tinue's place, which was rented by Mr Douglas. In Apnl Hall was discharged from Mr Douglas' employment, and Mr Douglas brought him to witnes*' hotel, and said he (Hall) was going to get a situation in Cambridge. Hall stayed, and lan into witness' debt about £f), when he cleaied away. Afterwards Mr Douglas called, and told witness lie had done wrong to take the melons, whereupon he offered to pay for them. Hall had made offensive offeiibive references to Mr Douglas. In mitigation of penalty, defendant went into the box, and stated that he had received great provocation, the nature of which he could not disclose without affecting others. On the day of the assault lie was greatly excited, or he would not have so acted. The man Hall was ab ul character, and had taken the melons, which weie his (defendant's) property, and he was annoyed that (.amp should have kept the man about the hotel. His Worship inflicted fines (including all costs), amounting to £23 4s, and bound defendant over to keep the peace for six months, himself in £100, and two sureties of £50 each.

Civil Cases. JVS. McI'jIEKSON Y. TE WIIKORO. — Claim, £15 Os 6<i for couuty rates. Mr Hay for plaintiff, and iMr O'Neill tor defendant. Mr O'Neill objected that the particulars had not been rendered in Maori, and .also pleaded that defendant had not received demand for the rates. Judgment deferred. Geo. Edkoeoumbb and Co. v. J. Tt Randerson. — Claim, £9 18&. Mr Hay for defendant. Judgment deferred.