THE COURTS—TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 6807, 22 January 1886, Page 2

THE COURTS—TO-DAY.

SUPREME COURT.-CIVIL SITTINGS. (Before Mr Justice Williams.) John Watson v. Alexander and Jessie Cullen.—This was a suit for the rectification of a boundary line. Mr F. R. Chapman appeared for the plaintiff; Mr Hosking, with him Mr Solomon, for the defendants. Plaintiff was a master mariner at Port Chalmers, and the defendants were tenants and near neighbors. The plaintiff owed two allotments at the intersection of Daly and Harrington streets, and one of these was sold to the defendants. The land was conveyed in terms of the certificate of title, and it now appeared that the boundary line went through the house on plaintiffs second allotment. His Honor was of opinion that the land actually contained less area than Cullen had been led to believe, and Cullen would therefore bo entitle to a reduction of the purchasemoney. The question of the frontage merely affected the area, and it would be a proper subject for compensation. In order to satisfy the equities of the ease, there ought, in the plaintiffs interest, to be a rectification of the conveyance. The question of costs would be Held over, and now that he (the Judge) had expressed his opinion a settlement of the matter in dispute might amicably be arrived at. Miller v. the Taieri County Council and Outram Road District.—Claim, L4UO, damages caused by the diversion of a stream, whereby the plaintiffs property wais injured. The declaration set forth that in 1877 the Outram Road Board made certain cuts or passages in the Maungatua district; that thereby the waters of a stream or watercourse formerly flowing into the Taieri River were diverted from their natural course, and in consequence of such diversion the waters had flowed over and upon the plaintiffs land, injuring his land and crops. It was further alleged that the S’aiatiff had applied to the Oufcram Road istrict, and to the Taieri County Council to close the said cuts, and to prevent the flow of the water upon the land of the plaintiff, but they had refused and neglected to do so. Mr Dcnniston, with him Mr Woodhonse, for the plaintiff; Mr F. R. Chapman for the Taiori County Council; Mr Chapman, with him Mr J. Macgregor, for the Outrarn Road Board. [Left sitting.] RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. (Before E. 11. Carow, Esq., R.M.) R. Brew v. W, J. Wilson.—Claim, LI 10s Gil, on a judgment summons.—Defendant was ordered to pay the amount claimed forthwith, in default ten days’ imprison ment. A. Tapper and Co. v. J. Dwyer.—Claim, L2O, for goods supplied on the order of one J. Low, who was in the employ of defendant ns contractor. Mr Solomon appeared for plaintiff's ; Mr J. Macgregor for defendant.—Judgment was given for plaintiffs far the amount claimed with costs. CITY POLICE COURT. (Before Messrs W. L. Simpson, W. Hutchison, and E, J. Spence, J.P.s.) Drunkenness.—For this offence Bridyet Connolly was fined 20s, or three days’ imprisonment ; Harriet M‘Corkbulale, 30s, or seven days’; Iluyh Graham , os, or twenty-four hours’; William Gibbon and Jessie. rihyrr were discharged. Disorderly Conduct.— John llavson was charged with behaving in a disorderly maimer in the public streets, and the case being proved ho was fined ss, with the al'ornativc of twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. Alleged Dog-stealing.— Michael Dvnn was charged with stealing a dog, the. property of George Mann, and valued at Lb. — Prosecutor stated that accused ealled at his place, the Leviathan Restaurant, and wanted to borrow a shilling. Witness declined to lend it him, and accused wont away. Shortly afterwards witness saw him carrying his (log away with him. He went into the Anld Scotland Hotel, and witness sent for a constable and gave him in charge. —James M'Grath and Joseph Scott stated that they saw accused pitch the dog up in the street, and, knowing that it belonged to prosecutor, they went into the latter’s place and told him. They then went after accused, and he gave them the dog at onco. Ho was drunk at the time, and seemed to treat the affair as a joke.— Miss Cuthbertson stated that accused took the dog into the Auld Scotland Hotel and offered to sell it to her.—The Bench said that the affair might be construed into an act of theft, but looking at the demeanor of the accused and the whole circumstances of the ease, they could not so interpret it.— The case would be dismissed. Alleged Embezzlement.— Andrew Gordon was charged with stealing the sum of LI 12s 9cl, the property of his employer, William Sanderson. The case was adjourned till to-morrow. Assault. — Thomas Freeman was charged with assaulting Charles Dowse. Mr E. Cook appeared for defendant.—The affair was a trivial one between two boys, and the Bench dismissed the case.