MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 424, 5 February 1909, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

POLICE CASES.

(Before Mr. W, G. Siddell, S.M.) REMANDED FOtl MEDICAL TREAT-'. . , ' MEN'IV v A young .rtamed Florenco M'Donald. ?v *68' charged: (1) with insobriety . aild (2) with' .. .boing ;an idle and disorderly.' person within ■ ; v tb6 : meaning of', tlife Police Offences Act, :• 1908; ,in lhat • she has insufficient -. lawful .'•'jneanß of support. • '■■■•■ • V:' i■ - o,.Station-Sergeant Darby, who stated: that . accused was suffering 'ffom the eifott. Of . drink,'.applied for a -remand ff>r 4 week: for medical ticatfiieiit.' A BREACH OF THIS PEACE. - '■•■■ Twtf -jtiung men,-AVm. beymour Eaton .arid Joliti M'lhtyro, were charged iwitli behaving . > iir?. such, a ■ manner.: in J Oornhill Street,. as to . 'occasipn .a; brcach of - the.\ peace. Eaton V pleaded:, not guilty, and M'lntyre. pleiided guilty.'; , Station-Sergeant-DarLy: stated' that Eaton ■/ had-.occasion to remonstrate. rwith; M'lntyre - ..fCr;,,'snT"pthinn r :ihe."didt-.iti-: Cornhill -;St)retr .wliereupoavM'lntyro-strack. him: on th 6 ttit., .:- liaton -. v.'is T'. disonaiged; ...-aiid: ftj'lntyte' was convicted tand fined: 10s., iti. i default 48 lioUrs' iinprisilitnent..-■■■ , . "DOSSING OUT.". ' ......j A young man named Herbert Hartley - Vploadedi 1 guilty to/ a-; ehiirgfc- ■of having .beCiV : found'iby night, without lawful eSeuse ill all ■ enclosed area: in Jervois' Quay, the property, of the-Wellington' CitCorporation. > Station-Sergeant Darby informed tho : Court that aooused; : wlio had been drinking, -«WaE'. found sleeping in the: Jervois- Quay- band, : rotunda.at S:3O a.ra;: ■Ho had no money, but i Bothmg" was knpwn against 'him ,• previously,. .;,HiS;.AYorship warned accused' to v careful ->in future,- and . entered a, Conviction . and'ordered : him^to fcoilie; Up for sdnteflte iwhea called on. , INSOBRIETY ' John Patterson and Peter James Mucltin chirged with insobrietj. ere e,ich eiimetcd and fined 10s., \uth tlife .alternatno'of'4B hoilrsj imprisonment. ' '' BETS iVND DEBITS Of HONOUR. ■ HOW THE LAW VIEWS THEM. , IMPORTANT JUDGMENT. :.:=Tho. gambling, law ftf ft re- • i served, decision £iv«ii by Dr, M'Artliurv: 5,M,,. ■ in.;a>clvil caSo". which 'arose.;out. of 'betting: ■■ transaction at the New. Zealand Oup;ni6etifigi} s'Thovplaintiffs. wore Jolni' Kemp.and Percy 31. y Camerofl ' (Mri Bunny),.(and :.tlie defendant, GebtgA Owler (Mr. Meredith). " . ' ' ■ < :■ :;Plalntilfs 1 alleged th&t Owler, acting on their • instructions, invested £T oil'the totalisat-Or.at thetGup nleeting: on Downfall, the winner of : of; plaintiffs as tho proceeds of the investment •>-£llf-ids;v<'.vlnr.{uiiii«r'.' : pursnance,:o{".instotac-' oh. u, Penates/,; winner : - The' prooeeds if the sinvestihOnt :On : : Peli&tcs ~ coiint e4, ; .t0 pi ai ritiffS f 6r>-jGC2:IS&. ;a iid' plaiilr.'; v tiffs, sued.-to recover the balance, £ci. ... . ■■ -. 'Plaintiffs and difendttfit; were .'eWtplcyees of s ■; the i same firm j f and: o\f ler proceeded ■: to the Chrlstehufch : races; -and4took.-.'£l-.vfrohr •: the .', plalntifts to .. invest . recording; t&' thfc. instf Ut-r . tions.'proviously: described. :■ His Worship siid i.i: h&J qracl (: *:0ie): pla:intiffs'; could ■'iriot' ; recover,", but had dbelillM -to > grant a ; svjt;;as) : iie,' had, desired; to defendant:; an 'espjanatibnlbfitlie'. v ..sjiidgmeiitjs^judgm^frbniihis^idenro ofgiving: ity:;the.defendant bailed ; . to; . ; . Statut(is l .isij.iu my opinion, conclusive as i to \ the' right of- action.- s lt.ym'ovidps i ; or ■etakedi in; any: betting-transaction whatever I ' iWhat can oe clearer or more compreliensivfe? I '. . ..-"If young men, 'or old ones for that matter, entrust .a companion with a sium 9f money to • invest oh the totalisfttor, thon no instructions giyen to hini will render him legally liable.to repay any dividend he may receive.- At least, ' ;-.: opinion gathered '-from:-.the ions, of.,tho Gaming Act, 1908. Those who •. give, tho 1 money for investment must rely not }'^pnj'the;;lawVf6r,'.reco,ycryy'..bUti".oriv : the.:horibur. :.i.:of;;theVp'erSoh':t'6 "y. Ju.dgment;;^ouldjbb;given : ;fpr : DQ Oosts:Would be allowed./': '. !;.! DECISION IN -k RENT CLAIM. • A cliiin of £4ifor rent-of a cottage let by ■ :C.;B; iPharazyn aild others, to '.Robert' Milhi- ■ ; ford formed the subjoot of a decision delivered : by:'Mr, .W. G. Riddell. : Defendant had: admitted that he had not paid the reilt,' but had ;vß^sßVs®Jdefenoe'{that'ifc^^ : and that .the ..Court.had no :- jurikliction. -. -In , June/>1907, one - Stafford ■ made an',offer; for the land bn iivh;c)i the cotv: ■: tagovstands.-v -Ho.'paid 6, deposit. v;.i Messrs." : Harcourt and Co., who were - plaintiffs' agentSj:: to receivft Offers for the land, but riot to accept .thsim.' PlaihtiSs said'tllat; the offer Vras Xi^oti'accepted' by.ttiew;-; : -. yet commenced aii ;a6tion' for; 'speelfiiiijwrforin^■< .. ance," 'although :m6ro ; than-.; a ,Vear.;sinco. h« ; j: inot.'itraiisfer,!the .land to hitti:: His Worshlp: held that theijClaim .for; rent -tvds .Within the :Courtjft i jurlsdiction/ and -.the A3"to title ;pro-: fluOed-by"Stafford Was not sufficient to cor.vih'cci ; him that. ho possessed.: the right -to ycoUMtidefendittt's : 5 as; a'factj the; ; inßv^a^;vent^led : : to • future payments, of - defendant's ' rent.--Plaintiffs were his landlords; ;and he should : have, yerified the information by referenCo to theni;:>- v Defendant's; initial < orror.i was l made position, had not ..been ' improved by failure on 1 Stafford's part',to ehfdrce .the alleged: con*' tract. -, Judgment; .would: be given for plain-- :. tiffs, f.for .',-tho,: ■ aciduilt'. claimed, with 7 costs: amounting to £2 6s. , COOKS' AND' WAITERS' AWARD. '' CLAIM FOR BACK'WAGES.' , , j!imes.„Sinolair,- : hotel, .employee,, claimed £lOJrom-J-.- Lutz, licensee of tho Park; Hotel, . ; for lyages alleged to have' been'.short paid ■ under.,tho and,Waiters-Award;■ . .'James'Sinclair stated that'ln January "1908 ■ he went to work for defendant Luta at the Parle Hotel. He Was engaged as a general v. aground inamat -£1 per. week;: Witness left . Lutz's employ-on November '24 and was then roceiving 25s.;per week, and had, received this fof . SBout "two months. 1 •; ; ..To s Mr. Levy: . Witness considered . that he i-T?as.-engaged;as a and not as a . about.'.- Witness was willing to be a TouSe- - abbu:-. .' Lutz: was, good to witness-whilst lie '. vas at .the hotel. -He was to get 20s ft week, nnd'three drinks .a day when- he took up the job, ■ '.'-'A;:E. Le Crenj -InspecMr of stated that.:; Sinclair joined Mr. Lutz's ,employ in' ■ October.' 1907, . Witness told ! Lutz that, ho a, breach of the Awird in em- :. .':p|oying;Sinclair;'at increased the wages:to 255. oti - Oetober 22. Witness clashed'.Sinclair as a. portfir. . . ... ~ Mr.' Hindmarsh,contended that .the-award provided . that a general hand was not to rcceive more than £1 Ss. per week unless a porter was kept at the hotel. , ■ ; vMr, Levyey did net:dlspute that the money .was.,due,'if the.previous, decision of the Ah bitration was.maintained oii thfi Jiiter- . protation of;tbe'meahlng of a'"general hand" i .arttLa; "porter." ■- He -was • willing _to pay-: the ,< amount into Court pending a decision.- " :"; ~His! . . Worship adjourned; the case tsine die, i in -order, to allow, 4 decision on . the .point to bp, obtained, from the • Arbitration Court. Mr. Hindinarsh appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Levvey for' defendant. '■ CLAIM FOR COMMISSION. John Ferdinand Gunsler, catercr (Mr. , Meredith)claimed £3 10s, 6d. froin-Robert Williamson; condiment manufacturer' (Mr. , I)ix)!;'. The claim was for. tho balance of commission on sales alleged to be due. Aftef hearing" the evidence, His : Worship gave judgment for plaintiff tor the amount claimed and <in«ts £1 12s.

\ DISPUTED ACCOUNT.

Christopher Smith, ■ draper, proceeded against I'.rhort M. Rosenbefg foi' £11 ss. Od. for goods, alleged to have . been sold and doliVored., iMr, Von Haabt appeared* tot plftintiff; . Mr;. the' dofondnnt. \ The' aefetfoe;-vaiV.thaV'defondaiit "at ftny time.- give hiß» wife authority to pledge his Jttlyv.lfio6'.'th6' pin-ties' were theii 4 . liviAg- -ill"'-- Sussex Square. . Defendant was-paying his wife an allowance, of £2 a-.week,' iind tho wife was lteepiiik'',hgai'tlei i s,'. which brought in sbiiidtlling like £4; odd n weelc. Sho" Was;tO. pay the household accounts. TJoieiidunt Was. never consulted. about, the openins of tho account. Any items procured in his name. were. foi-. the use. of his wife, aild the accounts had hcen. rendered to_Mrs. Rosenberg and paid by her, wlicll tllGy. Were paid.. Defendant had. sllbSequently advertised' that •. he;.' would net be responsible for any debts contracted by his wife; as, ho had .found' she had;'been; leaving herhousehold accounts unpaid, v. " •■. • : . JudgfflcAt 'was • reserved' • until Tuesday aext. ■j '.-y.y. -S'-vt;■