MAGISTRATES' COURTS

Press, Volume XXII, Issue 2855, 2 October 1874, Page 3

MAGISTRATES' COURTS

CHRISTCHUCCH. Thursday, October 1. [Before C. C. Bowen, Esq., R.M.] DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. Alevander Macdonald, for this offence, was fined 10s. Henry Woodgate, for being drunk and committing an act of exposure, was fined 20s, and J. M. Taylor and Reuben Davis, arrested for being drunk and fighting the previous night in the street, were each fined 10s. BREACH OF CITY BYE-LAWS. For permitting horses and cattle to wander, the following persons were dealt with. E. J. Comer, fined 5s ; John Fraser, 5s ; Wm Brooker (two summonses), 10s; Edward Dench, 5s ; James Kearney, 5s ; J. Buxton, 5s John Hickey, 5s ;Wm Grose, 5s ; Jas. Torrens, ss; and John Garland (goat at large), ss. Wm. J. White, summoned for tethering a horse in Oxford Terrace, was fined 10s. James Rowe, for not remaining sufficiently near his horse to have it under control was fined 10s. ILLTREATING A HORSE. The adjourned case against Joseph Allen, for hurting and harrassing his horse on the Papanui road, was called on. A witness, called by the police, stated that he saw defendant that day take his horse out of the trap on the Papanui road ; the horse was very unruly, and defendant beat him with a whip about the back, but not more than the horse deserved. By defendant—l think it was the horse who harrassed you, and not you who harrassed the horse. After hearing another witness, who declared the horse received only proper chastisement on that occasion, his Worship said he would dismiss the case, but it was his opinion that defendant had beaten the the horse most unnecessarily. Thomas Edwards was summoned for a similar offence. Sergeant Wilson stated that on the 18th September he saw the defendant's horse stop at the Worcester street bridge. Defendant commenced beating the horse, which was in a baker's cart. He (witness) went up to the horse, and observed that there were some large sores on the horse's shoulder. Defendant said the horse had only stopped that day in obedience to his orders. He had not the usual collar on the horse that day, and that was the cause of the sores. They were now dried up, and the horse was then outside the Court. Case dismissed. THROWING ROTTEN APPLES.

Thomas Denis and Peter Donnelly were charged with throwing rotten apples in Kilmore street and Papanui road on the night of the 27th August, to the annoyance of passers-by. Mr J. Anderson stated that he was driving in a dog cart with some members of his family that evening, and on arriving at the corner of Whately road and Kilmore street a number of boys were collected there, throwing some offensive matter, some of which struck him on the coat, soiling it very much. His (witness) son, who was driving, then pulled at his request, but though it was a beautiful moonlight night he (witness) could not recognise that the boys in Court were the boys who were throwing at the time. He believed the matter thrown to have been rotten apples. A little boy named Wm Smith, said he remembered Mr Anderson passing the Papanui road on one night in a carriage. The boys in Court were two of the boys who were throwing apples at each other at the time. Some of the apples struck Mr Anderson, and he was sure that Peter Donnelly was one of the boys who was throwing the apples. To his Worship—The boys were playing at the game of rotten apples. I was holding Denis's horse, who goes round with the Star, and I held his horse while he played the game.

Defendants said that they were playing sides at the game of rotten apples. His Worship said that this locality was noted for complaints of this kind, and the annoyance to passengers must be put a stop to. Defendants were old enough to know better, and they would each be fined 10s. His Worship also told the boys that if heard of any more of this conduct in Kilmore street he would certainly lock the boys up. WILFULLY DRIVINO SHEEP ON TO A PUBLIC ROAD. Walter John Taylor was summoned for wilfully driving some sheep, the property of Mr John Jebson, off some land of which he (Taylor) was not the owner, on to a public road in the Malvern district. Mr Joynt appeared for the defendant. John Jebson stated that on Monday morning, the 14th September he saw defendant on herseback, drive his (complainant's) sheep off the educational reserve in the Malvern district, across a public road, and on to the Messrs Willis' land. The sheep were driven into a yard and subsequently impounded, and he (complainant) did not know what had since become of them. He bad received a message that morning from the defendant, but the weather was too bad to draft his ewes. By Mr Joynt—l will swear that Ido not know thatj any of defendants sheep were in this mob that -day. I did not want i Sargeant Burtenshaw to take Mr Taylor into custody for sheep-stealing, and I don't know that the only object Mr Taylor had in driving the sheep, was to draft his sheep out of them. The complainant called two more witnesses, who gave evidence to the same effect. Mr Joynt called Sergeant Burtenshaw, who remembered going to Willis' yards, on Monday, 14th September. From what he could make out, Mr Jebson wished him to ! take Mr Taylor into custody, for illegally removing his (Jebson's) sheep. There were about 300 sheep in the yard at this time. Mr Jebson pointed out several of the sheep as his property. Mr Taylor's sheep were nearly all drafted out at the time. The day was very wet, and wonld not do ewes in lamb much good, but the yard was littered. The sheep were all in the yard when he got there. John Willis, a lad, stated that he saw the sheep string off the reserve that day on to the road oy themselves. At the time Mr Taylor was in his father's house, and did not drive the sheep. The sheep strayed on to the land of his (witness) brother, and then Mr Taylor and himself drove them into the yard for the purpose of drafting them. By defendant—l did not see Mr Taylor drive the aheep before they got on to my brother's land. I helped Mr Taylor to drive the sheep into my father's yard. His Worship said that though there might have been no intention to break the law, there had been certainly a breach of the Act, and defendant would be fined 20s and expense of witness. assault. Hans Dixon was summoned for assaulting Frederic Golding.

Complainant did not appear when called and defendant said that he (complainant) had told him that he had withdrawn the charge. His Worship said that no such application had been made, and as a criminal information had been laid, the complainant would have to appear. The case would be adjourned for a week. DESTRUCTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY. James Lambert, Harry Emerson and John Dunnage—three little boys, were charged with breaking a paling fence belonging to Mr Thomas Jones. Mr Jones stated that on the 24th Sep tember he was in his garden and heard a noise of somebody breaking his front fence. He ran out and saw the three little boys in Court running away. He followed them down the road and picked up the piece of paling produced which bad been broken off his fence. He did not see the boy break the fence, but he would like to observe that this practice had now become very prevalent. Emerson and Dunnage said tbat Jim Lambert had broken the fence, and this Lambert [ admitted having done. His Worship pointed out to the boy the wantonness of the act, and having commended him for sppaking the truth, inflicted a fine, one shilling, with a hope that his father would deduct this amount from his pocket money. The charge against the other boys were dismissed. FAILING TO OBEY AN ORDER OF THE COURT. The adjourned case against George Cookson, who was arrested under a warrant at the Malvern Hills, for failing to contribute two shillings per week towards the support of his mother, as ordered, was called on. Mrs Sarah Cookson, mother of defendant, said that she had not received any money from her son since the order was made, and she was unable to live without it. His Worship commented on the heartlessness of a son refusing to contribute even the sum of 2s a week towards the support of his aged mother, and ordered that if the arrears (225) were not paid, a distress warrant was to issue. TRANSFER OF LICENSES. A transfer of the license of the Ellesmere Arms, Tai Tapu. from William Judge to Robert Little was granted ; and also the transfer of the license of the Albion Hotel, Christchurch, from Joseph Perkins to C. J. Truckle. The applicants to renew their applications at the next quarterly sitting of the Licensing Court. SLAUGHTERHOUSE LICENSE. The adjourned application of George Duncan, Earn Valley, Heathcote, for a license to slaughter was granted. CIVIL CASES. James Hampton v John Cole ; claim £2 10s, tendered 13s ; judgment for £1 15s, and costs 14s. W. A. Knapman v James Downing ; claim £5 9s; judgment by default for amount claimed, with costs 13s. A. Culliford v T. Roberts ; claim £1 6s 4d : judgment by default for amount claimed, with costs 9s. LYTTELTON. [Before W. Donald, ifisq, R.M., and H. R. Webb, Esq.] Wednesday, October 1. drunkenness. William Bruce, arrested by Constable McGuire, was charged with drunkenness and using obscene language in a public place. He was fined 10s, which amount was at once paid. CIVIL CASE. Phillips v Cain—Tbis was an action brought to recover the sum of £6 17s 9d as damage sustained by the plaintiff through defendant's breach of an agreement to let a house and shop in London street, Lyttelton. Mr O'Neill appeared for plaintiff, and Mr H. N. Nalder for the defence. The evidence of the plaintiff and his wife was taken on behalf of plaintiff, and Mr Nalder called defendant for the defence. The counsel having addressed the Bench on behalf of their respective el'ents. judgment was given for the plaintiff for £4 l 7 s 9d, court costs 13s, solicitors' fee £1 ls.

Before the business of the Court commenced Mr Nalder stated he wished to bring under the notice of the Bench a letter in the morning's Press, signed by Jno Davis, reflecting on the conduct of the Bench in the late cases of Sutherland v Davis. He said he took this opportunity of doing so because Mr O'Neill, who acted as counsel for Davis, was present. The Resident Magistrate stated that the letter had been pointed out to him tbat morning, but that it was such a pieco of vulgar impertinence that he had not thought it worth while to take any notice of it. He might say, however, that tbe statements throughout the letter about the case were wholly untrue.