Default

Default

Default

Default

Default

Default

Default

Default

Default

Default

Default

This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES’ COURT

Friday, September 2.

(Before Mr. F. Guinness, R.M.) borough by-law breaches.

Thomas Simpson did not appear when called upon, being ill. The charge against him was of having been, drunk in chai-ge of a horse He was fixxed ss.

Duncan M'Kenzie couldn’t wait, and as old James Campbell was on the list of bylaw breakers, Duncan asked the old gentleman to act as his agent in the matter and pay over whatever the fine might be. Mr. Campbell took the job, and paid Duncan’s ss. for a straying horse. The agent’s offence was tethering a horse on a footpath. That cost ss. in exchange for an advice from the magistrate not to do it again..

Francis Le Breton did not appear in answer to a charge of leaving a horse and dray unattended, and was fined 10s. Chaxies Hill did not appear. He was charged with allowing a horse to be astray in Cass street, and was fined, in absence, 10s.

His Worship stated that if parties did not appear in future they would be fined in the full penalty.

Albert Roberts was also an absentee. He was proved to have been guilty of riding a horse across a footpath, and would have to pay 10s. Alfred Pearson, the bailiff of the Court, was charged with riding a horse across a footpath. He denied it. It was found that the information contained an error as to the footpath crossed, and the case was dismissed. Mr. O’Reilly, who appeared for the bailiff, said this by-law business was a levying of black-mail, and if it continued the citizens would each have to buy a copy of the laws and carry them about with them, to study how to save a five-shillings fine ; and they would have to carry five shillings always in their pocket, lest they' should bo whipped up, as he himself had been that morning, to answer a charge of riding across a footpath where no footpath existed. P. P. O’Reilly was accused of riding across a footpath half an hour previously. He objected to the summary way in which he had been summoned, and declined to appear.

j. F. Butler was charged in absence with allowing a cow to be 911 tlje loose, and was fined 10s.

Hay Smith, jun., was charged with driving cattle through the township during prohibited hours. The hours between which cattle can be driven through the jiowq are frqm 12 midneght to fa. m., and pottle drivei} during aiiy'pthgr timp njust bo so driven oxjly after'q pernjif hqs been obtained from the Town Clerk. The accused was fined ss. DRUNK AND DISORDERLY, A first offender, for whom Mr. O’Reilly appeared, was fined LI. .

A DOG OH THE ROAD. Samnel Boyle was chargd with obstructing the passage of sheep along a public road, and also with tethering a dog in the middle of the said, road, to the obstruction of' the public way. The charges arose out of thp". .lively cases— Cameron v. Boyle, and Boyle v. Cameron which were heard last Tuesday. The evidence taken was .of much the same character as that taken on : Tuesday, and at the conclusion of the hearing his Worship fined BoyleMOs. bn each charge, remarking on the danger to passengers—horse and foot—of tying up a dog in the middle of a public road. In the event of the fines not being paid, or insufficient distress being forthcoming, accused would be imprisoned for two months. £lO DAMAGES. Cameron v.' Boyle. —Claim LlO for damages sustained by plaintiff, in alleged injury done to his sheep by the actioxi of defendant, This was another ease that arose out of the Cameron v. Boyle and Boyle v. Cameron cases of last Tuesday. Evidence was taken at some length, similar to that already given, but bearing directly upon the injury done to the plaintiffs sheep by defendant’s dogs, the flocks having been furiously driven about. Mr. Donald Oliver, sheep manager, 'Westerfield, as an expert, deponed that ewes heavy in lamb might suffer very seriously if over driven, and compelled by an attack by dogs to run violently about. The ewes may miscarry or they may die, but anyhow they would suffer, though it would be difficult to define the amount of damage that may be done. His Worship was satisfied defendant had done a wrong thing, but'he would reserve judgment till Tuesday.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item
Bibliographic details
Word Count
732

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES’ COURT Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 148, 4 September 1880

  1. New formats

    Papers Past now contains more than just newspapers. Use these links to navigate to other kinds of materials.

  2. Hierarchy

    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.

  3. Search

    Enter names, places, or other keywords that you're curious about here. We'll look for them in the fulltext of millions of articles.

  4. Search

    Browsed to an interesting page? Click here to search within the item you're currently viewing, or start a new search.

  5. Search facets

    Use these buttons to limit your searches to particular dates, titles, and more.

  6. View selection

    Switch between images of the original document and text transcriptions and outlines you can cut and paste.

  7. Tools

    Print, save, zoom in and more.

  8. Explore

    If you'd rather just browse through documents, click here to find titles and issues from particular dates and geographic regions.

  9. Need more help?

    The "Help" link will show you different tips for each page on the site, so click here often as you explore the site.

Working