RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Inangahua Times, Volume v, Issue 33, 22 May 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

TtritfjDiY, Mat 21ht, 1878.

(Doforo E. Shaw, Rtq., B.M.>

MttftraT, I s William Qeorgo Brown W browglit up on romund, charged wjUli this dffonce. Tbo pirtiirotuw oft^tbmtf :»re alWsdj known to the public having been roported i in thoso columns upoo tbo' original hearing. ■■„ „ • r : ' ■ Mr litt <rith Mr Reid, rtppearod to oon duot tho prosecution^ anci Mr ;Moii ap* poarod ior the dofonoo. ' The following cridonco Wn» then cullodr P. Brennan—l oaw't i»j[ t|m|; dwing. the hearing of tho case BraWn v. Vulonn Company I heard Brown s«jy thattoftoold not write I know as o faiattdi of faot th^tßrowßcnp writev lj bate ««en him rrite, J knew his hafidrttttJn^. 'M»bg> niso his siKiiatorp op^^be," pay-shoot pro* dttoed. ' [ ■■■ i , Cro«>c>sateltted-il th| Vulcan Company The ititopinftttori In this ease i* laid *t' tile ihstanoe of the directors of the company* Pour of tb| directors vroro present^ Meswsi DaAin Clarke, Oaplos and Wynn« Heard BruWH swear thai Me had not driven n ueftain tunnel o» his own account. The Ar>w WM la the Company's mine, and might Ibe used by them ultimately. I bolie? e lUcre are mom n<#* working in tlnit p«ri tioular drive If defondant had been in* struotod by tho dlroctors to mako a drive in a certain direction I ihoiild have heard of it f hoard it said fytt tho.drjv^wai a prospbeting ono, and no u«o to ifo company t»p to that timgg could, oo^ say yibethor the drivo is auy'ooyil'to (ho 'company.... Have soon defonda/ltwrito oihtor wdnis bosides ', his own name, 110 has written lit my j office more than onco. Ho often awßictli ', mo how tq sfoll words, and I have told I him. Tho drivo which dofo»da»t refers to j wan spokon of as tlic nortU d rite. I know tho oxaat position of tliodrito in question; ' Hoard defendant rote' to a cross drive. Citn't sifcy whether defendnnl e*pecled pnytnmtt for t\\h {Mtrtictilar d»iv». Doil't roeollect h«ari»g defendent say that he would never make a thavge for the> drive in qiiestbtn. There nvo two tuses still ponding botweca the «ooi^)n»jf atid ttiu defendant* By tho Court— Tlio nnWs of the payees on pay shout produocd pro in defendant's writiao. I nKkcjuitoocrtniablmt tho 49 foot drive is the ouo whioh dufendnttt toM ma> ho was putting in- on Ms <wn account. Ho put in no afohn for the drive, until loriK ultor it wn» conoplotud^ Hoard dofffttoßnnt ony diHtinotly to tho directors that he was carrying in> tho iß^ foot drive on his own account.. . ' \ '„■; 2l ,', „..',', John Clark— l am ono of th« airooto^s of tho Vulcan Compnny. I wan present in the District Cburt on the 25th April, [ during, tho lioaring of tho | appeal onto bo- ! twootu tho Vulcon Company, and the do* fondant. I knew the workings of tho company* 1 kuow tho .company's main drive, but «ou,ldi not say 'positively what ooiutto it follows! It runs easterly. Thore i«nil»»a western dri^o< I sJbo> know what r» termed tho;4ot foot drivo. Hourd oKaminntton on- oath in tho case in quos* tion, and hwrd Brown swear that ho w.u« not driving live 4Hcot on his own account Heard dofondant say o» oath that Euithby ) Gulline, and M'LoughKn had outhori^od him to drivo tho 4f9feol, At tho hoarinu in quostion defendant ftWoro that he novor told tho directors that b» was not ptttling . in; the> 49» loot) dvivo oi> his own ae«ot>nt k tlnvo ropoatocUy [ward (Mondnnt smy to tho directors thai he was putting in the 49 foot drit» on his own account. Cross-exami nodi— Was iv, tht DintHct Oojurt during tho heamig, of the cane of Bitowtv v. Vulcan Company, I beliove ! men are now empbyod i» the direction of the -11> foot tunnel. Tho denial of the> drivo boin-yj any good to tbowxnpany was , not mado t^injuro defendant. Messrs Gollino and Bt»nn gave corro bcratiTC ovidonuev and at the- conclusion th 6 legal gcnittomon knving addrcNsod tho Oo»rt, aecuflod was commlttoil for trial at the next sitting of tho District Oour ► Uoeftou, bail being allowod.