R.M. COURT HAMILTON.

Waikato Times, Volume XX, Issue 1671, 22 March 1883, Page 3

R.M. COURT HAMILTON.

Yestkrd.yy. — (Before Mr Northcroft, ' K.M., and Mr S. T. Seddou, J.P.) !

Abusive Language. William MoLiesh was charged 'with having, on the 14th hist., used abusive and threatening language towaids one William Dethmer, landlord of the Railway Hotel, Fiankton.; The evidence of a man named Martin Brown showed that i a dispute arose about a "shout," and accused indulged in very bad language. The Bench inflicted a fine of 10s., with costs 2Ss.. # in default 14 days in Mount Eden Gaol.

Larrikinism. Duncan Nelson was charged with having, in conjunction with others (\\ ho have since been dealt with), (1) maliciously injured a gate, (2) placed ail ob&tiuction on a public load, and (3) biokena number of windows on New Year's Kye last. Accused did not appeall, but Mr O'Neill, who represented him, explained that he .resided at Tairua, and could not attend. Sergeant McGovern asked to withdraw the third charge. He was not bure that the window-bicaking was not the result of accident, and as the lad's mother had paid the amount of the , damage, he would like to withdraw the charge. The Bench acquiesced. For the first, however, they inflicted a fine of 405., 10s. damages, and £1 8s 6d costs/; and for the second a fine of 20s, and £1 Ss 6d costs.

Breaches of the Dog Registration Act. W. J. Manktelow, for neglecting to register a dog within the prescribed time, was fined Is and costs (20s). Henry Hinton, charged with a similar offence, ■ was let off with a caution and payment of the costs of the information, the Bench taking mto 1 consideration' the fact that defendant destroyed the dog before he was summoned. Capt. McPherson, on behalf of the Waikato County Council, prosecuted in these eases.

Alleged Furious Hiding. William Sharp, a lad, was charged with having committed a breach of the borough bye-laws by riding furiously on the footpath in Victoria-street, on the evening of the 7th inst. Seigt. McGovern conducted the prosecution, and Mr O'Neill defended. Thomas Hill deposed to having seen defendant riding at a furious pace down the footpath, but it seemed to him to have been a bolt. William Peacock gave evidence to the effect that he saw defendant galloping down the footpath towards the bridge, but did not think it was a bolt. The evidence of defendant,' who was examined by Mr O'Neill, went, to show that he was riding a skittish horse bareback, when the animal shied at a little child, and bolted along the side-walk. He had,just succeeded in regaining control of the. horse,,, when a flash of lightning causedit to start off again. When near the bridge i Mr Peacock made la movement which further frightened the horse. The Bench, in dismissing the case, ad* monised defendant to avoid in future riding flighty!horses .through the streets at other than a Walking pace. Civil Cases. , In the following cases judgment 'was given for the plaintiffs with costs t— B. and J. Coleman v. F. Keynolds,. claim, i £10 lls 3d. Mr O'Neill appeared for plaintiffs. The Bench reserved judgement in 'the case Le Qnesne v. A., Smith, claim, £7 4s 3d, for goods supplied and money lent to defendant's wife. The defence was, that previous to the transactions : the-wife's credit had been stopped. Mr O'Neill ' appeared for defendant.'' • . i < ■