Permanent link to this item
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT., Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 54, 29 January 1880
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.
o ASHBURTON— Tuesday, Jan. 27. (Before Mr. F. Guinness, R.M.) DRUNK. Charles Evans, alias Piccolo Charley, was charged with having been found drunk. Sergeant Pratt proved the offence, and defendant was fined 10s. Piccolo then made application for his property, consist- , iug of a two-bladed knife and some valuable colors. The police were instructed to return all property belonging to aim. USING OBSCENE LANGUAGE. Chas. Evans was charged with obscenity, and Sergeant Pratt proved the offence. Constable Farmer corroborated the Sergeant’s evidence. The defendant'was sworn, and said that since his last discharge he had been working at Lagmohr. He was quite sober on the occasion referred to in the charge, and had not used any such language as that imputed to him. He had been brought up in too good a school to use any obscene . language. M The Magistrate considered the chaigc , " proved, and said that as drink was no excuse*' for the offence committed, prisoner be fined 10s. and costs, or twenty-four hours. NO MEANS OF SUPPORT. George Douglas, an old man, was charged with having no visible means of support. Sergeant Pratt stated he had been in the Old Men’s Home, and had been turned out. ; ; i S. Maddisou, muster of the Home, said the accused was not turned out, but he had left voluntarily, and the rules of the Home wore that he could not admit those who had gone without leave. He had
seen him intoxicated in the street on one occasion when lie had given him leave. He was a bad character. The accused made an elaborate defence, which was unintelligible to the reporters. The magistrate considered the accused had misconducted himself, and sentenced him to 6 months’ imprisonment. CAPTAIN WEST. Parker West was charged with having been drurriw.nd disorderly. The acknowledged the drunk, but pleaded not guilty to the disorderly He bore too good a “ kairakter.” Fined 40s, or a week. —“Exactly so, your Worship.” VIOLENT BEHAVIOUR ON RAILWAY STATION. Henry Bowles was charged with using violent language on the railway platform. Constable Farmer gave evidence as to the accused having bullied she stationmaster. Air. Pilkii'gton said that on the departure of the 3.50 train prisoner was making a great noise, and witness checked him. Accused then inquired if he “ was Lord Mayor'of Ashburton.” The station was very much inconvenienced by a number of men hanging about it who had no business there, and he had instructions from head-quarters on the matter. Accused pleaded that he had had a few glasses of beer, and was going away by the train. Perhaps he had used words he ought not to have done, as he could not find his swag. The Alagistrate fined him 40s. and costs, under the 6th Railway Eye-law. CIVIL CASES. Knight v. Shearman.—Air Purnell applied for a re-heai ing in the above case, and would, on account of the distance at which the witness lived, apply for a hearing next Court day. He said it was a hard case for Air. Shearman. His Worship—A very hard case, and the application will be granted. Friedlander Bros. v. APAvey. —The defendant is a prisoner in the Lyttelton gaol, and the jailor had refused to allow the summons to be served mi defendant. The Magistrate granted house service, so as to deliver the summons on defendant’s present place of abode —i.e. the gaol. Fletcher v. Nelson —Claim Ll 6 IGs. Air. Branson for plaintiff, Air. O’Reilly for defendant. Air. Branson objected to Air. O’Reilly appearing for defendant, as the late firm of O’Reilly and Ireland had previously advised plaintiff ; and as the Court had ruled that he (Air. Branson) could not appear in Shearman v. Knight, the same argument would appl)' in tiie case now before the Court. Air. O’Reilly said the case referred to by Air. Branson was not anything like the present one. Air. Branson had appeared for Knight, the plaintiff, and was nonsuited. He then brought the same action for Shearman, as plaintiff against his former client. In the present case the plaintiff had taken advice from Air. Ireland, and the latter had written to defendant. Then the plaintiff had employed Alessrs. Branson and Purnell to sue. Surely he (Air. O’Reilly') had every right to appear for the defendant; if not, a person could by taking advice, and paying Cs. Bd. to each solicitor, stop them all from appearing against him. Such a contention was preposterous. Even supposing the objection a valid one, his Worship had no jurisdiction, He (Air. O’Reilly) was an officer of the Supreme Court, and by the 30fch section of the R.AI. Act, he was entitled to audience in the R.AI. Court. His Worship had no power to deprive him of his status. Mr. Branson had made an application to Judge Ward under similar and his Honor had asked Air. Branson^what he required him to do as he had no jurisdiction over officers of the Supreme Court. Even Judge Johnston had referred such questions to the proper tribunal —the Law Society. He (Air. O’Reilly) would insist on hia right to appear. His Worship decided that he was bound by his former ruling under similar circumstances. Mr. O’Reilly submitted that they were entirely different circumstances. His Worship decided that Mr. O’Reilly could not appear. Mr. O’Reilly applied for an adjournment, so that he might take further steps in the matter. Air. Branson objected to Air. O’Reilly appearing in any way in connection with the case. His Worship ruled that Air. O’Reilly could not apply for an adjournment. Mr. O’Reilly then handed his papers to his client, who applied for an adjournment. Mr. Branson objected to defendant looking at the papers, as some were in Mr. O’Reilly’s writing. This was overruled. His Worship said he would grant costs against the defendant, who then elected to go on with the case, if he had to pay costs. James Fletcher, carrier, deponed that he agreed with Nelson to cart three or four loads of timber from Ashburton to Methven, at 3s. 6d. per 100 feet. The contract was made on a Alonday, and I carted the first load on the following Thursday. I could not get it before, as the defendant did not have it ready till then. I went on the Alonday for a second load, and Nelson told me it had all gone away on the railway. I said there must be some allowance, and he said nothing, but went away. I could have taken 6000 feet in four days with my eight horses. My costs would be L 3 os. 6d. for the two trips, and the freight would amount to LlO 10s. I calculate my net loss at L 7. By defendant—l did not promise to come on any particular day. You were not there on the Thursday when I came - for the first load. There was an understanding that I was to cart timber which came from Christchurch by the Alethven line. 1 don’t know that tlic stuff I carted from the Methven line was from Ashburton. .1 saw a lot more stuff on the Alethven line. I came back because I could not work for the wet weather. I would have made more money by carting the timber from Alethven than from Ashburton. W. Collins, timber merchant, proved the delivery of 3000 feet on the 27th Nov. to Fletcher. Nelson’s contract used up about 10,000 feet. The timber was ordered on the previous Saturday. Fletcher could have had ?• load on the Monday. I don’t recollect seeing him till Thursday. Nelson’s men were working at the timber up till Friday. S. B. Nelson, swown—l agreed with Fletcher on 22nd November to cart timber to Methven at 3s. 6d. per 100, and he was to start on the following Tuesday, and could have had a load that day, hut as he did not come I went to Rakaia and arranged with the Methven Railway to carry it, and the timber had gone by rail before Fletcher came. I told him he had not kept his word. He said, .“As I am here you might give me a load,” and I gave him one on condition that lie would cart all the stuff from the Methven ling. He agreed, and I sent handg to help him to load, Ho catted one load, when he left, on account of the weather. John Cox proved the fact that timber I was.ready for Fletcher to cart away on * £bfe Tuesday, and that a second agreement was made to cart it from the Alethven line. After argument by counsel for plaintiff, and by defendant, the latter conducting his own case very commenclably, judgV ment was given for plaintiff, with costs. Saunders Bros. v. Proctor Bros. — Claim, L4l 18s. 9d, Air. O’Reilly for plaintiffs. Arthur Smith, clerk for plaintiffs, proved the debt. Judgment for amount due and costs, his Worship allowing expenses of one witness, who had been subpoenaed. Wood v. Ladbrook. —Claim, L 7 13s.
J udgment for amount claimed and costs, to bo paid in a month. Edmiston Eros, and Gundry v. Johnston.—Claim, L2B 11s. 9d Mr Ireland, for defendant, pointed out that the law required in such cases ten days’ notice to appear before the Court, and applied for the case to be dismissed with costs. The Court allowed L2 2s. cos la.
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT., Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 54, 29 January 1880
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.
Papers Past now contains more than just newspapers. Use these links to navigate to other kinds of materials.
These links will always show you how deep you are in the collection. Click them to get a broader view of the items you're currently viewing.
Enter names, places, or other keywords that you're curious about here. We'll look for them in the fulltext of millions of articles.
Browsed to an interesting page? Click here to search within the item you're currently viewing, or start a new search.
Use these buttons to limit your searches to particular dates, titles, and more.
Switch between images of the original document and text transcriptions and outlines you can cut and paste.
Print, save, zoom in and more.
If you'd rather just browse through documents, click here to find titles and issues from particular dates and geographic regions.
The "Help" link will show you different tips for each page on the site, so click here often as you explore the site.