RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Inangahua Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1248, 21 March 1883, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

* : Tuesday, Mauch 20iii, 1383. (Before W. H. Keyell Esq., R;M.) POLICE- V. M'DOWAL. . Tefendant was charged by the. police under the "Vagrant Acf»; J> with being illegally on the proimses<#f • Mrs Dauks, on the night of the 19th instant. - --Defendant dented the charge.- "' '" Constable M 'Manus-. staked, tthat at an early hour of the morning, he found defendant lying in Mrs Daiika' stable, Mrs Banks had frequently complained of the '"defendant hanging about her place at night, and she vaß frightened he might i burn the place down. Elizabeth Danks : I am proprietress of the Empire Hotel, Broadway, • ileefton, defendant came to me and asked far accommodation, I told him I would not have him about thg premises. After this he put his horse in ' the stable and persisted in ■hanging about the stable at night I then aeut for the : police to remove him from the premises. Gross-examined : I told you that there was no room for your horse or yourself in the stable: This closed the case. Jfefondant made an incoherent statement, the substance of which appeared to be that he only used the stable when the stalls were empty. The Bench said defendant had rendered himself liable to twelve months imprisonment, but it was hardly neceusary to inflict such a terra in the present case. It was neeeßsary, however, that the rights of property should be ehforced. Defendant's character waft such that hotdkeeper s did not care to have him about thoir premises, and he must be taught that he cannot force himself upon them with impunity. Sentenced to fourteen days imprisonment in Reefton gaol. HOGAN V. HOLLYWOOD. Defendant was charged upon information, with having committed wilful ;md corrupt perjury in the Magistrate's Court, Reefton, in his evidence given in the civil case of Hogan v Hollywood. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Sergeant Novell conducted the prosecution, and the following evidence was call el • . •■" Henry Lucas : I am clerk of the Magistrate's Court, Keefton, a sitting of the Warden's Court was held at Reefton on the sth February, 1883, Warden /Well presiding ; on that day Denis Eogan applied for a certificate =of registration for a dam, situate at Soldier's Hill. I produce the application in question ; the application was opposed by James Hollywood, the accused. Denis Hogan : I am a miner, working at Soldier's Gully, and am acquainted with the accused. Turing the early part of last month I applied for a dam and tunnel. I cannot rtad or write : My application for a dam was objected to by the accused, James Hollywood ; during the hearing of the application James Hollywood was asked for his miner's right, and he produced a miner's right dated two or three days after I took out my application. This question was asked by Mr Jones, my solicitor ; accused produced the miner's right in question, but His Worship did not accept the miner's right in support of the application ; accuscc' was asked if he had another miner's right, and he said yes : He did not produce it, as he said it

had got burnt hi the fi*J- near the Catholic School before j;u;t ChrLtmns ; He sayj hid • hut aiiu < 'ings were all burnt at thd swino time. H; i hut was not burnt ; the <:Terfc of the.Cimrt was asked iy the: '■■> ardea fc> 'anarch tlie-.registor of miner'o- right:, to see whether accused had ;i right : accused ;hen said tbiU lu>. had talcan out his ritrht j at Ahaur» r thiiic^i) or fourteen month* ago ; hi- 1 akv> said that ho tr >k > out-bi-sn; _ self ; at the time he stated this he was on Lis oath in the witness bW; : l r -Wasiti court wiipu accused waasworn p'land saw ,the btuiif? arlmhiisit-i the, oath to him.. By iiccosfld : I belijve you Have been working at Soiviio:v Por'fourtojn months; you hava been working ru an average two or tinea davg a, week ; I posted applications for a dam and tunnel in that locality. , Ernest C. KeHing : I am at present clerk of the R.M. Court, Westport ; never Bft?.' acciued before i.i my iife, to the best •if my knowledge. About 12th February last I received a telegram from Mr W. H. J.jises, soli'^'ior, i.eefton, asking trie whether I haJ haiiod a miner's right in the name of James Hollywood during thelast twelve or sixteen months ; I searched the register and replied that T had not done so. Produced the blocks of all miner's rights issued at Ahaura during the jvast two years, and I have examined them pa< jr.iL'y, and find that no right has been igsucil to 'the name of James Hollywood ; jjoitl.crjias a/py application be^n mn^niiiy "that liam'p fora fight : For two years^ prior to the 22nd Feby., 1883, I was the only person authorised to issue miner's ricjhte at Ahaura. Shortly after the date of tho information I received a letter from a person named James Holly woo ,1, asking whether a Mr M'Garrity had taken out a miner's right for the writer of tho letter. I answered the letter stating that no 6uch right had been taken out, or applied for : I was receiver of gold revenue at Ah aura for two years or more orior to the 22nd Feb., 1883. Geo. Willis : I am bailiff to the Resident Magistrate's and Warden's Courts: Keefton, I know both Denis Hogan and James Hollywood. I attended tho sitting of the Warden's Court on the 3rd Feb ; and on that date, there was nn objection hoard to an application by Dor.is Hogan ; two witnesses wore sworn, Deuib Hogan, and James Hollywood, 1 administered the oath to James Hollywood and he was sworn on the Holy Bible, and in the •u^ual form ; heard accused . give his evicuce on that day (the witness here corroborated the testimony previously given iisto the evidence of Hollywood on the day in question). This close'? the ca3o for the prosecution and accused having ivaerved his defence, i he was committed for -.rud at the next nttiug of tho District Court, Reefton, Bail was allowed, accused in £60, and two sureties of £25 each. Civn, Cases. Green v. James O'Qfnnor, claim for £2 us 6'J, .^ou-ls siifplied ; no appearance of jefendant; judgment by default for the amount claimed and co^Ls. Mr Lyncli' for plaintiff. Bronnan v. Allen, tliis was a olaiiu fur i>ll being balanced of rent dae for ho. el ; j'U,'ment by default for amount claini«i and uost?, 19s. • Thomas a;id Mcßeath v. Edward Hankins, a claim. for £7 10 for goods sold and delivered, judgment by de.fault for Rmoniit ckiraed a,nd costs. ■;. . O'Kcill v. 'SittheYlaiid £11 15s 6d fcr goods supplied : : judgment by de- ' faul t for amount claimed and coats and profo visional fee. Mr Lynch for plainO'Neill v. Paton 10s for goods .sold and delivered. Judgment by default for -amount and costs. • MrLyilch for plaintiff: \ •■•*>■ - :l • Williams v. Ak Piin, £6 10s adjotu'iied. i 1 •■. ■' " Sniitli & Barkley v. Davies £18 12 2d for goods supplied, judgment for amount by default and costs. Mr Jones for plaintiff. Gihnev v. H. Carter £20 10s dishonored promissory note for cash lent Judgment; by default for amount and ccsts. Mr Jones for plaintiff. O'lTeill v. McConoughie, claim for £15 on a joint and several promissory note. . . Mr Lynch appeared .for plaintiff and Mr Jones ibr defendant. -...-, Judgment was given for the amount claimed and costs. •• . : GKEEN V. BOXBOROUGH. This was an information charging .defendant with wrongfully removing a child from the Black's Point State. School dm ing tho hours of duties Mr Lynch appeared for the defence. The following evidence was given :— Richard Edward Oreen : I am teacher, under the Education Act, in charge of the Black's Point School. Jn the 26th February last a gentleman came to my solvmA aud asked for Mr Roxborough's boy He did not ask for me, but I saw the boy leaving with the visitrnr. I went to the door, and told the gentleman that I could not allow the boy to leave the bl-liool, an it was against the rules to do so The rules are that no child shall leave tht school after it is open, except in ca3e of aickness or other urgency. He to! 4 me Mrs Roxborough wanted to have the boy's KUeness taken. This I considered a frivilous reason, and refused to allow it. The gentleman then went away, and in about half-an-hour Mrs Roxburough came into the school, and went up to the class where the boy was. I went over aud told her that I could not allow her to take the child, and she caught hold of the boy's •rm and removed him which I did not resist. Mr T ynch characterised the action of the master as despotic in the extreme. The Education Act gave no such power to schoolmasters as that claimed by Mia in-, formant in this case, and his interference with the right of the parent was a piece of unheard of impudence. The Magistrate said the informant had quite mistaken his functions He had no right whatever to act as he had done. Oaso dismissed, and each party to pay their own costs