THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 12866, 16 July 1906, Page 4

THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

MAGISTRATE’S COURT. ''

(Before H. Y. Widdowson, Esq,, 8.M.) Judgment for plaintiffs by default was given in the following cases:—Mollisons, Ltd (Mr J. MacGregor) v. Alfred J. Breach (Christchurch) for £1 15s (goods supplied), with 5s costs; Scoullar and Chisholm, Ltd. (Mr J. MacGregor) v, A. J. Breach for £3 11s (goods), with 10s costs; W. A. Smith (Mr W. L. Moore) v. Annie Harper for £2 5s (goods), with 10s costs; William Lind (Mr Adams) v. William Conn for £1 18s 6d (rent), with 6s costs ; Oswald Coates (Mr Davey) v. J. Trainor (Oamaru) for 12s (balance on promissory note), with 5s costs; Ahlfeld Bros, and Co. (Mr Burnard) v. S. Clark and Co. (New Plymouth) for 8s costs. ‘ Otago Daily Times * and ‘ Witness ’ Newspaper Company v. Benjamin Chapman Calverley.—Tins case, which was a claim for £2 TOs, rent of an office, was disposed of in plaintiffs’ favor on Monday last. _ Defendant now applied for a rehearing, on the grounds that plaintiffs” evidence on cross-examination took defendant completely by surprise, and that defendant liad independent witnesses to contradict plaintiffs’ statement that the office was removed by the defendant immediately after plaintiffs had carried out their agreeipent with defendant.—The aplication was' refused.

Thomas Paterson and Co. v. S. A. Bush. —Claim, £8 15s Bd.—ln this case there was no appearance of plaintiffs, and the case was accordingly struck out, costs for £1 Is being awarded the defendant. Tiro Commercial Agency Company (Mr Baron) v. F. De Lisle.—Claim, £6 19s 9d. on a judgment summons.—His Worship made an order for payment of tho amount, with 8s costs, by monthly instalments of £l, in default three days’ imprisonment. Dawson and Co., Ltd, (Messrs Irwin and Irwin) v. Alexander Geary.—Claim, 10s, balance due on a judgment summons. *—-Defendant to pay amount forthwith, with expenses (ss), in default three days’ imprisonment-. ' John J. Dunn v. Loufea A. Wedge.— Claim for £l6, comm is ion on tho sale of thirty-two knitting machines, and £8 13s 4d, a month’s wages in lieu of notice. Mr B. Irwin appeared for plaintiff, and Mr John Maogregor for defendant.—Defendant paid into Court the sum of £5 5s on account of commission, and denied liability in respect of wages, asserting also that full commission was only payable when the m) re bines were delivered.—His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for the amount of commission paid into Court, with tho addition of £1 (commission on two orders), with costs. On the remainder of the claim for commission plaintiff would be nonsuited, and in respect to the question of wages His Worship was satisfied there was nothing due. Joseph Molloy v. Martin and Son. Claim for £l2 9s 6d, for commission on orders obtained for ball stands. Mr B. Irwin appeared for plaintiff; Mr W. 1, Moore for defendants, who filed a set-off and a counter claim for. £5 Os 9d, goods supplied for sa3e on commission and not accounted for, and advance made on an order by a customer.—The main question of dispute was as to whether the commission of 40 per cent, was to bo paid oj the gross or the not. Plaintiffs contention was that the understanding was on the first-named footing.—Lindsay A. Russell gave evidence as to tho usual custom in regard to advertising methods. Commission was paid on the gross amount hooked. (Left sitting.) CITY POLICECOUBT. (Before C. C. Graham, Esq., S.M.) Drunkenness.—Peter John Shea pleaded guilty to being drunk on the railway station on Saturday evening. He was represented by Mr Chilian, juu., who eaid that accused was willing to hav(( a prohibition order taken out against him.—He was fined 10s and cab hire (2s), in' default forty-eight hours’ imprisonment. A first offender, for committing the same offence on the railway station, was fined the same sum.—‘-Another first offender did not appear, and was similarly dealt with. A third first offender was fined ss, in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. Elizabeth Pl'eecc pleaded guilty.—She having a situation to go to was discharged with a caution. Alleged Breaking and Entering.—Hugh Fox was charged with having, at Mosgiel, on July 15, broken into the dwelling of William Ings, and stolen 2s 6d, the property of Alice Ings.—Accused, who was arrested by Detective M’Lecd, was remanded till Friday.

Trouble in South Dunedin.-—Harry Pattersun, who was defended by Mr Hanlon, pleaded not guilty to charges of disorderly conduct while drunk at South Dunedin on July 14, using obscene* language, andl violently resisting Constable Duke in the execution of his duty. Station-sergeant King prosecuted.—Sergeant Conn statedi that he arrested the accused on Saturday evening. Shortly after eleven the accused, who was howling and calling, got off a car. Witness told him to go, whereupon ho used bad language, and made to strike witness. Constable Duke assisted in the arrest, and the accused resisted all the way to the station, using bad language. Witness could hoar the accused singing and yelling when the car was 300 yds away. He had a “down” on the accused for his conduct—-a “ down ” that ho had on all of occufed’e class.—Constable Duke gave corroborative evidence, stating that be and the sergeant heard the noise on the tramca? when it was nearing Ogg’s Corner. Constable Dart gave evidence covering the same ground, stating, however, that he heard no bad language from the accused until Sergeant Conn spoke to him.Thomas Gallagher, a fitter, stated that be heard the sergeant speahj to someone, and order him home. Subsequently he saw the sergeant and someone struggling, and on the ground. This witness did not swear to the accused, and his evidence apparently bore as much on the arrest of a second prisoner charged subsequently. Witness stated that lie heard or saw no objectionable behaviour until the sergeant spoke to someone.—The defence was that the accused was going home singing when.interfered with by the sergeant. Mr Hanlon contended that the very fact that the accused was allowed to travel oh the car, and was not ejected from it, was evidence that his conduct was not such as to justify arrest or interference. His put it to the Court that the sergeant had, as he admitted, a “ down ” on the accused, and hearing them (accused and his brother) singing, thought that it was an opportunity to interfere with them.—The accused stated that he and his brother went out to South Dunedin, where they lived. They were singing in the car, and were not interfered with. At Ofrg’s Comer they proceeded to go home. He saw Sergeant Conn at tlio corner. The sergeant followed him, and caught him by the neck, and said ; “ Get away homo. What arc you doing here?” and “Get away home,.you low dog.” There was no occasion for his arrest... He would swear that he used no obscene language before his arrest, although he might have after the arrest, when he was very excited and indignant. Alexander Patterson, brother of the accused, gave similar evidence, Tho sergeant followed tlfcxn from the car, and pushed his brother. The Magistrate intimated that he intended to convict, and Mr Hanlon spoke jn extenuation of the obscene language. He said that it could not be called wanton .obscene language, as in the case of a man going up to somebody and miscalling him in obscene language. In this case the man thought he was being wrongfully amated.—The accused was convicted., on all three charges. On the first he was convicted and discharged, on the second he was fined 50s. in default one month's imprisonment, and on the tlnrd l.a was fined 40s, in default one month's imprisonment. Ousts 6s, obtained in one case.—"--A charge .against A 1 exaader Patter-

T son (the former defendant’s brother) of being guilty of disorderly conduct while drunk in South Dunedin, and of wilfully obstructing a constable in the execution of his duty, was adjourned till Wednesday. Prohibition Order.—An order was granted against a man on the application of his wife.