THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 6032, 12 July 1882, Page 3

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT. (Before E. H. Carew, Esq., R.M.) Judgment waa given for plaintiffs by default in the following cases:—Stewart and Denniston v. George Hunter, claim, L 3 19s, for legal services rendered; D. C. Cameron v, Thomas Bennett, L2 15?, for papers supplied ; same v. Samuel Brooking, L 5 14s 2d; Briscoe and Co. v. James Winter, L 53 8s 3d, for goods supplied; H. Lyall v. John Henderson, L 5, for board and lodging. E. Brown v. John M'Auley.—Claim, LlO, value of a dog the property «f plaint'ff and shot at and injured by defendant.—ln this pre-viously-heard case His "Worship now gave Judgment for plaintiff for LI 15'<, with costs. Henry'Guthrie v. R. Cochrane.—Claim, LlO S3 3d, for rent of a coal store. Mr Solomon ■appeared for plaintiff ; Mr Donniston for defendant.—From the evidence tci'ven by defendant, it appeared that he had nothing to do with the fltore, which was taken and occupied by his tretber. —Mr Solomon elected to take a 'nonsuit. Annie Alexauderv. John Salmon—Claim, L 7, mono) lent. Mr E. ©ook appeared for plaintiff ; MrD. M. Staart for defendant.— This partlyheard case was resumed, defendant's mother stating that lie waa born on November 6, 1562. Witness produced a family bible containing an «ntry of defendant's birthday. To Mr Cook : The entry was made two or three years ago by a young man. It was not made so that if defendant was sued he could be made out under age ; it was done for no purpoie at all.—Mr Cook said he had v.o evidence to disprove the abatement that defendant was not of a?o. —His Worship said ho must give judgment for defendant, but in a case of this sort would allow no costs. William Thompson (Trustee in Cotterill's Estate) v. John Salmon.—Claim, L 4 17s 6d, on a judgment summons. Mr E. Cook appeared for plaintiff; Mr D. M. Stuart for defendantMr Cotterill stated that he had supplied the clothes and that defendant had told him that, in addition to his earnings as a shoemaker, he had money coming in weekly from property of his. —Defendant positively swore that he had no property and never said he had.—His Worship said it was not proved that defendant had means, and he could not make an order. H. Burman v. Thomas Sutton.—Claim, L2O 7s, on a deque. Mr Adams appeared for plaintiff; Mr Kettle for defendant —Robert Goodison stated that the deque produced bore the signature of defendant. It was givea to witness by defendant in the Ciiterion Hotel, luvercargill.—His Worship: You had better prove, Mr Adams, that the cause of action arose here and not without the jurisdiction of tho Court. —Mr Adams (to witness): Where was the cheque given? Witness: At InvercargilL—His Worship : The case will be struck out. William Irvine v. the Minister of rufolic Works.—Claim, Ll2, damage caused to goods of plaintiff while waiting at the railway station. Mr Stout appeared for plaintiff; Mr Haggitt for defendant, [Left sitting.] CITY POLICE COURT. (Before J. Haslett, Esq., J.P., and T. C. Do Lacey, Esq., J.P.) Drunkenness. For this offence Frederick Shaw was cautioned and discharged. Neglected Child.— Jeremiah fforan, aged eleven, whos-> term of commitment to the Industrial School iiad expired, was re-committed to the institution for four years. Neglecting to Register.— Charles Cornish admitted failing to register within sixty-two days the birth of his male child, born at North Taieri.—He was fined Is and costs, and ordered to register the child's birth. Family Differences. James Walsh waß charged with assaulting and beating Mary Walsh, his wife, at St. Kilda, on the 10th mat. She also asked that she be bound over to keep the peace.—Mr Callan appeared for the complainant ; Mr Macdonald for the defendant.— Mr Callan said that complainant brought these proceedings very reluctantly. The assault was the last of a serieß committed by Walsh on his wife, but unfortunately she had confined the information to the one beating. Being in danger of her life Mrs Walsh asked that her husband be bound over to keep the peace.—Mr Macdonald submitted that a mere complaint for assault was not aufficienttohaveapersonaskedto find sureties.--The Bench, however, thought differently, and decided to let the case proceed.—Complainant stated that her husband had repeatedly beat her for the last seven years and had threatened to kill her the first chance he got, On Monday, when he came home, he beat her, and she called him a murderer. She was in fear of him doing her some bodily harm. In cross - examination the witness admitted that the disagreement had been partly caused in consequence of her having her sisters in tho house contrary to her husband's wishes.— William lies, a neighbor, stated that he had been frequently annoyed by rows In defendant's place, and by hearing complainant's screams.— Mr Macdonald submitted that ho could not be expected to ajiswer any alleged assault prior to the date mentioned in the information. The facts Telied on should have been set out in the information.—The Bench did not think the defendant had treated his wife in a becoming or creditable manner. He would be bound over to keep the peace for six months in his own recognisance of L2O, and two sureties of LlO each. — The Defendant: I cannot find them.—The Bench : Well, if you can't you can go to gaol. Damaging Pbivatb Property.— Richard Paton, a boy, was charged with unlawfully committing damage on the house of Richard Mookler by throwing stones on it.—The defendant's mother appeared, and said that her son was afraid to come into Court. —The case was adjourned uutil to-morrow for his appearance. Embezzlement. Cuthbert M'Kellar was charged, on the information of Alexander Simpson, of Outram, for that, on the 13th April, at Mosgiel, then being a clerk in the National Bank of New Zealand, he did receive and take into his possession on account of the Bank the sum of L 25, and did embezzle the same. Mr J. Smith appeared for the prosecution, Mr Callan for the accused.— The case for the prosecution was that on April 13 the accused, manager of the branch bank at Mosgiel, received from Daniel Fisher, a publican at Mosgiel, the sum of L 29 2s, of which L 4 2s was in cheques and the balance in notes and gold. This balance tho accused was charged with embezzling. On receiving the money he gave a pay-in slip as follows; "Paid in to the credit of Daniel Fisher the sum of L 29 25." The accused was relieved of the charge of "his agency on May 17, and when the books came to be examined there was no entry in the day-book or teller's ca3h-book of this sum of money,—The hearing of the case- occupied the whole afternoon, and hud not concluded at fivo o'clock.