R.M COURT, CAMBRIDGE. A Breezy Half-hour.

Waikato Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2251, 11 December 1886, Page 2

R.M COURT, CAMBRIDGE. A Breezy Half-hour.

Ykstkkday. — Before His Worship the Mayor (Mr J. Gwynneth, who took his neat on the Bench for the fir.it time), Messrs A. Clen:ents and T. B. Lewis J. P, H. Ashen v. If. Thompson. -Claim £11. Mr Dyer who appeared for pl.iintifr, asked that this cane might be adjourned for three months, to enable defendant to complete an arrangement he had entered! into. Adjourned until the last sitting of the Court in February, 1887. Waikato Coal and Shifting Company v. J. B. Lamu.— Judgment numinous for £27 Od lid. Mr Whitaker applied to have this case adioumed until the 23rd instant. Granted. Stephen Lodder v. W. Lockf.ky.— Claim, £2 10s. Judgment for plaintiff with costs, 11s. T. Gkmmilf, v. Wm. Ckimmins.— Claim, £7 2s. Mr Dyer said he did not appear for plaintiff or defendant, but as neither of them were present and he was fully acquainted with the case, he might elucidate matters by stating what he knew about it. The defendant was a merchant at Tauranga, and had assigned his estate to his creditors. The deed had been sent to him (Mr Dyer), to get the signatures of the Cambridge creditors, and Gemmill, the plaintiff had signed it, so nothing remained but to strike the case out. The Bench: The case must be struck out as neither plaintiif or defendant appears. KINCAIO Y. HEWITT. Edward Hewitt was charged with using language calculated to cause a breach of the peace on the 26th of October, in Dukestreet Cambridge, viz. "If you want to pay your debts plead you are a drunkard.'' Mr Dyer appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Whitaker for defendant. The Mayor at the outset referred to a statement which had been publicly made to the effect that Messrs Clements and Lewis, being in a manner mixed up in the case, would not sit, and that the case would be adjourned until the R. M. could be present. He commented upon the statement in very severe terms, and said it was an insult to the Bench. Mr Whitaker then made a formal application to have the case adjourned till the I 23rd inrtt., when it was probable the R,M. would be present. The Mayor : It is not five minutes, Mr Whitaker, since you said you were prepared to go on with the case and would abide by the decision of the bench. Mr Whitake : No, I think you must have misunderstood me. Mr Dyer: My learned friend certainly said so. Mr Whitaker : Well I merely make the application and am willing to pay costs. Mr Dyer : I contend that, as solicitor for plaintiif, I should have received notice of this application. It is not customary to apply for an adjournment without giving proper notice to your opponent. The Mayor : If Mr Whitaker will mention any of the Justices that he objects to they will retire. One can hear this case. Mr Whitaker : That places me in an invidious position. I simply apply for the adjournment. The Bench decided that as defendant had agreed to pay the costs the case would bo adjourned until the 23rd inst. Mr Whitaker : The application applies to b.)th cases. The Mayor : We have not the other case before us yet. One case at a time. Defendant pays' coats, £2 lGs. (To the Clerk) : Call the next case. In this case the defendant was charged that he did on the 23rd October, in Duke.street, Cambridge, make use of the expression, "Oyou ," which was calculated to cause a breach of the peace. Mr Whitaker applied to have this case i adjourned until the bame date as the former one. The Bench : We have decided to go on with this. Mr Whitaker : I think I am entitled to— The Mayor : Mr Whitaker, will you plead. We cannot help what you think. Mr Whitaker then declined to plead. Mr Dyer : If my learned friend declines to ulead, that is tantamount to a pled of not guilty. He then proceeded to address the Bench, and said the information was laid under the Police Olfences Act, 1884, Sub-section 29 of Section 3 of said Act. Mr Whitaker : Before my learned friend goes any further, I again apply for an adjournment on payraeut of costs. The Bench : We have decided to go on with it. Mr Dyer, contimiing, said the penalty under the statute quoted was £5. Tne Mayor, to Mr Hewitt : As your solicitor does not choose to plead, do you plead guilty or not guilty. Defendant : It places me in a very awkward position. Ido not know what to do. Mr Dyer said Kincaid was a storekeeper in Cambridge, and defendant formerly kept the Criterion Hwtel at the corner of Duke-street, in the same town. Plaintiff frequently passed the hotel in going to and returning from dinner, and had often heard Hewitt make remarks to or at him. Many times he had allowed them to pass, but had at last felt compelled to come to the court for protection. Mr Hewitt here stepped inside the rail, and took a seat next to Mr Whitaker. The Mayor asked Mr Hewitt to retire behind the bar, and said it was an insult to the bench for a defendant to take a seat without asking permission. Mr Whitaker: There you show your ignorance. This is not a— The Mayor to Mr Whitaker : If you pass those insulting remarks we will very soon put you where you cannot make them. To defendant : You may take a seat. The defendant seemed to prefer standing, and remained doing so until the end of the case. William Kincaid deposed : lam a storekeeper in Cambridge. My private house is m Alpha-street, and my store in Dukestreet. I remember the 23rd October. On that day I was coming from my dinner, and when passing Hewitt's Hotel defendant looked across the mad at me, and said "(), the——, if you want to pay your debts plead drunkenness." The Bench ; Wo mu>t not hear anything about the first case. Mr Dyer explained that the case that had occuned first had been put on the cause list as the .seond and vice versa. Both informations were laid at the same time. Plaintiff said he would not swear to the date of the fir.-'t offence. He thought it might have been said in the heat of the moment, I and had decided to let it pass, but when it was expected he went at once and took out a summons. It was fortunate he was not a righting man, or ho should have gone for defendant, ho could not swear if the offence occurred on the 21st. or 23rd. October. The Bench : The summons says the 23rd, so the case is di&mis.sed. The defendatit was allowed 10s costs.