CHRISICHURCH.

Press, Volume LI, Issue 8932, 24 October 1894, Page 3

CHRISICHURCH.

TUESDAY", OCTOB-U. 25. (Before C. Hool Williams and W. Williams, Esqs., J.P.'s.) Drusksnnbss.—lsabella Leckie and Catherine Brown were fined 10s each for drunkenness, in default forty-eight hours' imprisonment. Mischievous Bovs.—lnker man Berry, 14, Thos. Ernest Moss, 16, Geo. Berry, 15, were charged with stealiug twelve eggs, value Is, the property of Ann Brunsden, at Lincoln road, on the _*lat inst. They pleaded "Guilty." Tho Bench cautioned and discharged the boys on the understanding that the.'parents punished them. lakerman Berry, John Laurenson, 14, and Alex. Malone, 15, were charged with stealing a quantity of flowers, value 2s 6d, the property of Ann Brunsden, on the 21st inst. Berry pleaded "Guilty," and the other two boys, for whom Mr Donnelly appeared, denied tho charge. The flowers were alleged to have been taken at the same time as the eggs during the absence of Mrs Brunsden. The charge was E roved against Malone and Laurenson. Mr "onnelly addressed the Bench, and contended that the boys should not have been brought before the Court on such a trivial charge, but that they should have been punished by their parents or schoolmaster. The Bench said there had been so much flower stealing that the polio, would be wanting in their duty if they did not take up cases like the present one as it was the only way to put a stop to it. Berry and Laurenson would be I convi.ted and discharged, and the charge against Malone would be dismissed.

Cass Rkmaxded—Charles Travers alias Jeremiah Driscoll, alias John Hinds, was charged with being a rogue and a vagabond, having insufficient lawful means of support, and having been previously convicted as an idle and disorderly person. He pleaded not guilty, and on his application the case was remanded till Friday. Alleged Vagrancy.—William Alexander Miller was charged with having insufficient lawful means of support. He pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr Donnelly. Detective Benjamin deposed that the accused came from Dunedin about the beginning of August. He lived and as* sociated with persons of known bad character. Witness had ordered him to leave the town and he went to Hawke's Bay, but returned a few weeks ago. Chief Detective O'Connor, Mary Jane Gray, Sergeant Briggs also gave evidence as to the character of the accused. Mr Donnelly add ressed tbe Bench, aud called the accused, who said he came from Australia six months ago, and then had £74, and £27 of it was left when he arrived in Christchurch. He had been unable to work through an illness which he had contracted after he came to Christchurch. He denied that he was an associate of bad characters. The Beach said the accused had given some grounds for the charge being brought agaiust him, bub in order to give an opportunity to leave the place, and sever the connections he had made, the case would be adjourned for a week. (Before R. Beetham, Esq., S.M.) Civil Cases.—Marriott v City and Suburban Tramway Company, claim £8 Bs. Mr Wilding for plaintiff, Mr Byrne for defendants. Plaintiff alleged that in January he contracted with the Company to keep its line in repair from Bennett's corner to Burwood at £2 2s per week, the contract to be ended by a mouth's notice on either side. On June 4th he received a month's notice, but before the time expired the chairman told him he could continue on as usual. About September 12th the chairman toldhim that tenders were to be invited for the maintenance of the line to the beach at New Brighton, and asked him to tender, the new arrangement to commence on October Ist. Plaintiff tendered, but unsuccessfully, and on October 2nd was paid off. He now claimed, under the original contract, payment of four weeks' wages in lieu of notice. The defence was that the original'contract had been determined by the month's notice, and tbat plaintiff had been kept on afterI wards from week to week at the Chairman's pleasure. -. The Secretary to the Company, on September 25th, gave plaintiff notice that ' his tender had not been accepted, which was equivalent to notice of discharge, and by continuing him on wages till October 2nd they had fulfilled all their liability to him. -After hearing evidence the Courtheld that the notice of intention to call for tenders waft good as a notice of termination, but that on that date, {September 12th, the plaintiff was entitled to a month's notice. He had worked out twenty days of that time, and could recover for the balance. Judgment was for plaintiff for £3 10s with coats £245.