From the Deal, Walmer & Sandwich Mercury, 22 September, 1865.

ASSAULT.

Thomas Obree, boatman, appeared in answer to a summons charging him with assaulting Richard Orrick, another boatman.

Richard Orrick deposed - Last night, about half-past nine o'clock, as I was going home, I heard some persons run down the beach, saying there was a blue light burning. I also ran down, and found several boatmen there, who commenced laughing; and when I found it was a false alarm I laughed too. Thomas Obree then came down, and said, "You long b_____, if you laugh at me I will give you a slap in the mouth, and throw you into the sea." I said, "I hope you will not." He then came towards me, and knocked me down with his fist; the wound on my eye was caused by the blow. I got away as soon as I could.

John Ashington corroborated the above evidence.

The defendant said that he was, in company with others, in the "Napier Tavern" on Wednesday night, when Orrick ran by the window, and called out that a blue light was burning. He jumped out of the window and ran down the beach, when when he got there the complainant laughed at him, and, being exasperated, he struck him.

The defendant was ordered to pay a fine, including costs, of 15s.

From the Deal, Walmer, and Sandwich Mercury, 9 July, 1870. 1d.

USING THREATENING LANGUAGE

Thomas Obree, waterman, was summoned to answer the complaint of Onesiphorous Sneller, who alleged that on the 16th of June last, in the parish of Deal, he threatened to knock his brains out, and that on several previous occasions he had used similar threats, which were calculated to make him (the complainant) commit a breach of the peace.

Defendant said unfortunately for him both his witnesses were off, but the case was one which all the magistrates aught to take up, as it was all about a lugger. Both his witnesses were friends of Mr. Sneller, and used his house.

O. Sneller said: I keep the "Napier Tavern," Beach Street. For the last 14 or 16 months I have frequently been abused by the defendant. We were part owners of a lugger, and because I objected to the purchase of new boats the defendant said I should never have any peace as long as I lived and that he would ruin me. He has made three these threats several times. I have not used excited language to him only when he has commenced at me. On this particular day I was at home and the defendant came into the room and seated himself close to me, and afterwards shook his fists in my face and said he would knock my brains out. He was drunk then or else he would not have done it - it is only when he has been drinking that he abuses me. I expected every moment that I should have it. On these occasions his conduct is so irritating that I fear I shall commit a breach of the peace.

From the statement of Obree it appeared that on the 16th of June the lugger of which he and the complainant and Mrs. Smith were the owners was sold. He always worked the boat, and had to pay for the wear and tear pf all her gear before he got his money, and he went to the complainant on the evening after the sale thinking they were going to settle up; but the complainant told him that he had not had time to get the bills in, whereas he had been out in the marshes getting a horse out of the dyke. He noticed that a spy-glass, some woods, and a piece of rope that belonged to the boat had not been sold with her, and on his speaking to Mr. Sneller about it he became irritated. He ultimately agreed to settle up upon the following Saturday, but had not done so.

Mr. Sneller explained that the woods were broken, the rope was his own, and the spy-glass he had forgotten about, but had promised to take it at a valuation.

Ultimately the Magistrates bound the defendant over in his own recognizance's in the sum of £10 to keep the peace for three months, and advised the parties to call in a third person to arbitrate upon their differences - a piece of good advice which each said he was willing to act upon.