DISTRICT COURT REEFTON.

Inangahua Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1224, 24 January 1883, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT REEFTON.

Monday, January 22nd, 1883.

(Before His Honor Judge Broad.)

The Court having been opened, the names of the jurors summoned were called over and the whole having answered to their names, the panel was then struck, but owing to the large number of challenges on both the aide of the Crown and the defence, the juiy list was exhausted. The names of the challenged ( jurymen were then replaced in the 'lottery-box," and by drawing again the required number of jurymen was socured. Mr D. Oochrane was chosen foremen. Mr Perkins opened the case for the Crown and in a lucid and forcible address set forth the main facts upon which the prosecution relied. He called the following evidence : — Robert Clinton Savage : I am a mining speculator living in Reeftonand recollect the 12th December last. On that day I was leaning against Dawson's Hotel door and had my hands in my pockets, and my pipe in my mouth, while in this attitude the defendant came up to me and pressed me back to the door with his left hand and struck me several blows on the cheek with his shut list. As soon as I could get my hands out of my pocket, I caught him by the beard and pressed him against the other door. I felt that my jaw-bone was broken or dislocated, round, swinging blows were given. I could not get my hands out of my pockets quick enough to defend myself. He muttered something but I could not catch it. I gave him no provocation for the assault, and thought that he wa3 a man who would have rather taken my part. Two- days previously several persons, with myself were expressing opinions as to the value of mines and I remarked that no man could estimate their^value unless he saw the stone broken down. Clifford dissented and we bad some words. He jumped up quickly from the sofa upon which he had been lying and threatened me, but I was prepared for him and, he then said he would meet me another time. After the assault on the 12th December my mouth was full of blood. I was very ill for four or five days, and even now can hardly eat anything on one side of my face. I burst a a blood-vessel two years ago, in Wellington, and was not in perfect health at the time of the assaidt. Cross-examined by Mr Lynch : There is a drop from Dawso'ns door step to the footpath, defendaut had a white coat on at, the time. He was not in his working clothing. I will swear he struck me four blows before I could get my hands out of my pockets. Did not call defendant a d liar on a previous occasion, never gave defendant to understand that I was I prepared to meet him. Defendant never j asked to retract any expression I had made use of to him. Have not been confined to my bed through the accident, never mad^e any threatening gestures or grimoccea towards defendant in my life. Henry Stanley Thorpe : I am a surgeon residing in Reefton and recollect Savage calling upon me on the 12th December last. He said that he had had a severe blow on the side of the face and I found one of the bones dislocated. There was a dent on the side of the face, and some discoloration. The fracture cannot be re duced. On the following night saw prosecutor when he was spitting blood. The blood came from the lungs, and the hemmorhage was probably caused by over excitement and exertion. William Faler was called but his cvi- 1 dence was not material. This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr Lynch then opened the case for the defence and briefly opened the grounds upon which defendant relied. He called the following evidence : — Charles Fraser : I am a mining speculator residing in Reefton, and recollect the 12th Dec. last. I was present in a room with Savage , Clifford and several others, Savage and Clifford had a dispute upon a mining question, and Savage said, "If lam a fool I'll admit it, but you're a d — fool and don't know it. Savage said it in an insulting tone, Clifford called our attention to the remark and asked Savage to withdraw it but he refused and failed to do so, after this Clifford rose up and asked Savage what he meant by such remarks and the two seemed to be watching each other as if for a battle, but somebody went in between them and stopped the row. Clifford subsequently said that he would leave the matter over till to-morrow, and Savage seemed quite satisfied to do so. By Mr Perkins : Have not had any law suits with Savage j Am not aware of any ill-feeling existing between myself and Savage ; Am sure Savage called Clifford a "d d fool," swear positively that Clifford asked him to retract those words, and he refused, and Clifford said he would meet him on the following day. Thos. Bruce : I am a mining speculator residing in Reefton. Remember meeting Savage, Clifford, Fraser, and several others in Dawson's parlor, when a dispute arose as to the ability of persons to estimate the yeild of gold by the appearance of the stone. In the course of the discussion Clifford, in reply to a remark by Savage isaid, "that may do at the Lyell, but it won't do us here." Savage then said to Clifford "If I am a d fool I will admit it, but you are a d— fool and don't know t.' The two then stood up and I went between Clifford Wtia asked to retract the words but he would not do so. Clifford then said that he would have an understanding next time they met, and Savage did not seem to object. Py His Honor : Both parties were perfectly sober. By Mr Lynch : Judging of the conduct of both Savage and Clifford after the expressions had been used, neither party appeared to regret what had been said, or to fear consequenoes. This closed the evidence for the defence. The jury then retired, and upon their return brought in a verdict upon the minor count of "common assault," and defendant was lined £20. The court then adjourned. WYNDII ,M V m'IKNNON BROS. This case was called on, when an argument ensued as to whether the court had jurisdiction to hear it. After an adjournment His Honor ruled as follows : —

Two objections having been taken to the hearing of this case — the first suggested by the Court — is that the complaint does not shew that the alleged ground of action is one relating to mmmg — and the other raised by the learned counsel for the defendant, is that the complaint does not shew that the amount or value claimed by the plaintiff exceeds one hundred pounds. Dealing with the latter first, Section 157 of " The Mines Act, 1877," provides that this Court shall have an original jurisdiction with the Warden's Court over all cases in which the amount or value claimed by the plaintiff shall exceed one hundred pounds. To found jurisdiction, therefore, it is requisite to shew that the claim exceeds one hundred pounds. That is not shewn here. The first count alleges an improper sale under a bill of sale, and it is sought to set the sale aside and to have accounts taken ; but there is no allegation that anything is due to the plaintiff ; nor can the Court infer from the plaint as it stands that he claims any specific amount . or value. There is a claim for LIOO damages, but this will not help the plaintiff, as the amount to give this Court jurisdiction, must exceed that sum. The transaction also appears to have been an ordinary mortgage of chattel property, and although the chattels happen to be mining property, I do not think that makes the contract one " relating to mining" within the meaning of the Act. The Victorian statute has a special clause giviug the Courts of Mines jurisdiction in such cases, but there is no such provision in our own .Act. Both objections to the jurisdiction are therefore, in my opinion, good. I may also point out that even if thislast objection were not tenable.there would be no power to amend the plaint so as to get rid of the first ; because the Court cannot by amendment give itself jurisdiction.