LYTTELTON.

Press, Volume XXXI, Issue 4287, 26 April 1879, Page 1 (Supplement)

LYTTELTON.

Fbidat, Afbii, 25. [Before Dr. Rouse and H. Allwright, Esq., J.P...1 f| Wahthd to bb Hahqkd.—-A man "described as a sailor, but from whom no information as to his name or occupation could be obtained, was preaanted charged with - loiteriug at the gate of the gaol. Warder Woolley testified 'that he refused to more on, arid Chief Gaoler Phillips said that on .Wednesday the accused came to the-gaol and demanded that he be hanged right off. Witness thought the man was unsound in his mind. Remanded for seven days for medical examination. "LabO-ST. —A little boy named Bright, arrested for taking 3s 6-i from a little girl in the! street, was discharged, the prosecuting witness being unable to state the circumstances of the affair. The boy asserted his innocence most positively, and wanted to call witnesses to prove an alibi. [Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.J Tba-SI-B op LiC-HSB. —An application was made to have tho license of the British Hotel transferred from Mrs S. De Costa to, Mr Thomas Graham. Mr Joyce asked that the application be withdrawn, the applicant, Mrs De Costa, so desiring. Mr H. N. Nalder, 1 for Mr Graham, urged that the transfer should be made, the purchase money having been paid over on the agreement that Mrs De Costa make tho application. The -Bench thought the request to withdraw the applioa-f itiqn mußt be allowed, and if the holder of the license was not in possession of the" house the : party in possession might apply for a new license.'

SB-ACK OP PIJB_IOHOU_E QBDINAKOB.-r Andrew McDonald, proprietor of the Canterbury Hotel, was charged with keeping his house open during prohibited hours, and withl not having a light shown as required by law; Mr Nalder- appeared for defendant, who denied the oharge. Sergeant-Major O'Grady said he found persons drinking m the house at 11.20 p.m. on Saturday, the sth instant. Constable Montray said there, was a light in the room behind the bar. and persona in there who were not bona fide travellers. There was no light in the bar. Cross-examined —A I man named Kelly had a glass in his hand.; I I think it was beer that was in it. Mr Kelly ; said that it was bnt a few minutes past eleven. He was in the house for the purpose of having a game of billiard?, not to drink. He did not drink; was a teetotaller. Several witnesses were examined, the evidence going to show that no liquor was sold after, eleven o'clock. Exception was taken to the information,' it- being made out to include the two offences.» His ..Worship remarked that the information' in that p*fc ticular was bad, and the case would be dismissed. For not keeping a light burning defendant was fined 10s; Henry Hardecke, Albion Hotel, was also charged with keeping his house open and selling to other than bona fide travellers. Mr Nalder raised the same objection as to the two offencea—namely, keeping the house open, and selling liquor after hours, being stated in the one complaint. The cue was dismissed. A similar case against. J. T. H. Montgomery, Mr Joyce counsel, waf withdrawn.

ABBAP"_I. —J. T. H. Montgomery was charged with assaulting James Beaton, belonging to the barque Bells. Mr Nalder for complainant, Mr Joyce for defendant. Complainant said he went into # room at the Lyttelton Hotel on Sunday week last, and the defendant, who is holder of the license, caught hold of him by the collar, and threw him against the billiard table with'great

violence. Witness's head was badly out, and he bad been unable to go to work since the assault. Cross-examined — Witness was " pretty well on" at the time. Be direct — Had all the liquor I drank that day in the Lyttelton Hotel, and was served with it by Mr Montgomery. It was Sunday. William. Smith corroborated complainant's statement. He and complainant afterwards went around the block and into the Canterbury Hotel, where they each had a brandy and soda. Then then returned -to the Lyttelton Hotel. One or two other witnesses were examined to the tame effect. J. T. H. Montgomery said he waa 'endeavoring to turn the' plaintiff out when he incurred the cut on his head. The plaintiff afterwards deliberately smashed several windows, and did other damage. Crossexamined—l am only the. manager of the hotel. I was perfectly-sober, because lam a teetotaller, and have been for many months. John Bell, a boarder/said Beaton was very noisy when he came i nto the house. He was very talkative. James Patten was iv the passage on the Sunday in question. The plaintiff came put and threw a water jug, and <mr>«hed it, and put his fists through the window panes. Tbe Bench said thia case arose, through the fault of the landlord in allowing the man into the house when he was intoxicated. The injury resulted from bis drunken condition. The landlord was justified in using force to put him out. The case was dismissed.

Oivnt Oasbs.—Rouse v Hillier; judgment by default and co«ts 295. Hewston t Simondson, claim 15a; judgment by default, costs Bs. Hardecke v Ford, claim £4 la lOd j judgment by default, coats Ba. Robinson v Da Costa, claim £18 15s; Mr Nalder for plaintiff, with costs 36*. Eastwood v Riley, claim £71 6s 6d, £15 6a 6d paid in Court. Mr Nalder for plaintiff, Mr Joyce for defendant. Wm. Eastwood said—l was engaged as a compositor on the " Port Lyttelton i Herald "on a written agreement of £4 per ! week for six months. I had been making up the paper, but it was not my duty to make it up. I had set up the paper on the day upon which I received a notice to leave from Mr Riley. I had set up the paper. Hia note stated that as I had not seen fit to make up the paper I might consider my aervicea were not required longer. Cross-examined—Up to the time I received the notice I had been in the habit of making up the paper. I told him previously on the same day that I would net again make the paper up. Re-direct—When I made the agreement with Riley he told mc I was to have two hands to help. mc. I had two for a week or so, but not since. I had to work twenty-two out of twenty-four hours. J. Watson, a compositor of twenty years' experience, said he had worked on small papers similar to the "Fort Lyttelton Herald," bnt had never had to make up the paper aa a part of hia duty as a compositor. Under such an agreement as plaintiff had made witness would not make up the paper, and if he did he should consider he bad a right to refuse to do ao at any time. W. Riley, defendant, said when the word compositor was inserted in the agreement I understood it to mean to make up the paper. I hare never worked as a compositor, but hare employed men for many years.. There are no hours regularly recognised for compositors to work. They work until the paper is out. Judgment' for amout paid into Court, £15 6s 6d, and £4 damages and costs., Bouse t Webb, claim £25 5s 6dj judgment for amount olaimed, with costs. Mr Nalder for plaintiff. M. Thomas vT. O'Brien, claim £1 ss; judgment for amount claimed, with costs; and solicitor's fee 21s. Mr Nalder for plaintiff.