MAGISTRATES COURTS.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 364, 12 August 1875, Page 2

MAGISTRATES COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, August 12, [Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.]

Drunk and Disorderly. —Edward Goodacre, an old offender, was lined 40s, Andrew Magin, 20s, and George Cresswell, ss. Mary Ann Kirkwood, charged with being drunk and soliciting prostitution, was lined 40s. Illegally on Premises. —Win. Ryan, charged with being found illegally at the rear of the hospital at half-past two o’clock this morning, was lined 10s. Absent erom Vehicle. —James Jenkins and Albert Brown, charged with being absent from their horse and vehicles, were each lined 10s.; Edward Griffiths, charged with a similar offence, was also lined 10s. No Light on Obstruction. Jervis Beard, summoned for not keeping a light on some casks of cement in the road way, was lined 10s. Fighting in the Street. R. M. Humphries, charged with lighting in Barbadoes street, on Sunday, Ist August, while the people were coming out of the Catholic Chapel, was lined 10s. Indecent Conduct. —William Johns and

Edward Blackmore, two small boys, charged with writing indecent language on Mr Chudley’s fence in Manchester street, and also with repeating the same aloud, were strongly cautioned and discharged, their parents promising to give each of them a good thrashing. No License.— Louis Smith, charged with driving a stage carriage on the Ferry road without having a license, was lined 10s. Unregistered Log. Thus. Claridge, summoned for being the owner of two unregistered dogs, was lined TOs.

HOUSES AND Cattle at Large. For permitting horses and cattle to wander, the following persons were dealt with :—W. A. Crooke was lined ss; James Brown ss; Henry Knowles ss; Hubert Morton ss; Robert McPherson ss; John Griffiths ss; Thomas Potter ss; Philip Evenden ss, and Peter Hill ss. Obstructing the Police,— James Manning was charged with obstructing the police in the Devonshire Arms Hotel a little before one o’clock on the morning of the 25th July. Mr Thomas appeared for defendant. ActiugJSergeant Gatwood deposed to hearing voices in the hotel that morning. Defendant came out for a few moments, and when he saw witness he slammed the door and prevented him getting inside. Mr Lewis, called by Mr Thomas, stated that he, the barman, and a lodger were only clearing the house for next day, and defendant had only opened the door to go for a bucket of water. Fined 20s.

Breach oe Publichouse Ordinance.— Daniel McGuinuess was summoned for selling drink and keeping his house open during prohibited hours, and also with permitting gambling in his own house on this occasion. Mr Thomas, who appeared for defendant, said he was instructed to admit having sold liquor during prohibited hours. On this charge and the one of keeping open a fine of £5 was inflicted altogether. The charge of gambling was then gone into. Sergeant Gatwood stated that on the 25th instant he with another constable were in front of the house and heard the jingling of money. When he got inside he saw the barman in the bar, and in a room adjoining he saw the lessee and three other men with a dice box in front of them. There was a silver coin on the table, and one of the other men was using the dice box. In reply to Mr Thomas, witness said that the coin on the table was Other a 6d or Is. A man named Bowley picked the dice box up, and he thought it was Mr McGuinness who took the coin up. He asked the men present where the money was, and they replied there was no money ; that they were merely throwing for drinks. He got in by the kitchen door, but he did not knock at it, Edward Bowley stated he was at defendant’s place on the night of the 26th July, when the sergeant came in. He and the other men were throwing for drinks. When the proposition to do so was made, Mr McGuinuess objected, but it was overruled. He would swear that there was no money on the table. He (witness) put the dice in his pocket when he saw the sergeant, and after he (the sergeant) came in he took the dice out of his pocket. Mr McGuinness objected to the dice being used. They all paid for the drinks, and though he (witness) got change there was none on the table. Mr Thomas called William Wedge for the defence, when his Worship said that, though satisfied with the constable’s evidence, he would dismiss the charge. Charles J. Truckle was charged with keeping his licensed house, the Albion Hotel, open and selling drink during prohibited hours on the 25th instant, A third charge of permitting prostitutes to assemble in the house on the 23rd iust. was also preferred against the defendant. Mr Tbo.mas, who appeared for the defence, admitted the first two charges, and his Worship inflicted a fine of £5. The latter charge was then gone into. After the evidence of Henry Thomkins had been beard, Inspector Buckley asked that the charge might be withdrawn, to which his Worship consented. James Stevenson was summoned for selling drink in his licensed house, the Wheat Sheaf Hotel, to other than honaflde travellers. Mr Thomas for defendant, admitted the offence. Fined £5. Drunk and Creating a Disturbance. —James Brown, charged with creating a disturbance at the Wheatsheaf Hotel, was fined 10s. Breach of Public-house Crdinance. —Edward Brinkman, lodging-house keeper, Peterborough street, and holder of a wine and beer license, was charged with selling drink without supplying other refreshments. Mr Thomas appeared for defendant. Constable Paget deposed to going into defendant’s place on the morning of the 31st July. When he got inside he saw some men with a cribbage board in front of them. There were empty glasses on the table, which he had been told were there since supper time. Defendant told him that the men in the room were lodgers. There was some delay in opening the door, and defendant said he had first to go to the kitchen for the key of the door, which was on the bunch. The evidence of the men who were in the house at the time went to show that the only drink supplied that night was at supper-time. Case dismissed. Committing a Nuisance in a Railway Carriage. —Edward Gorman, charged with committing a nuisance In a railway carriage, on the Christchurch and Lyttelton line, was fined 10s. Breach of Stamp Act.— J. J. Parker, summoned for failing to stamp a receipt for £4 10s, was fined 20s. Creating a Disturbance. Patrick Ryan and Ann Ryan were charged, the former with creating a disturbance in the Wheatsheaf Hotel, and the latter with breaking a window in the house. Mr Joynt appeared to prosecute. The landlord of the hotel, deposed to Ryan having fought with another man in the house on the night of the 27th July, and refusing to go away when requested to do so. After the fight, Mrs Ryan came there and threw a stone at him, and subsequently threw one through a window. After further evidence was given of defendant having taken part in the row, his Worsh'p advised Ryan to take the pledge, and fined each defendant 20s, and damage £1 11s, His Worship also told the male defendant that if he kicked up any more rows, he would have to bind him over to keep the peace. Lunacy from Drink.— John Krolden who had been remanded for a week, was discharged with a caution. Driving on Wrong Bide.—George Marshall, summoned for driving on the wrong side of the road, was fined 10s, and costs 6s 6d. Using Threatening Language and RESCUING A COW.—Alexander Rountret w is charged with using threatening language t iwards James Archer, and also with having i legally rescued a cow. Mr Joynt appeared {jf the prosecution, and Mr Thomas for

f he defendant. From the complainant’s evidence it appeared that defendant’s cow strayed into his garden on the 2nd August. He was driving it to the pound. Defendanl set some dogs on it, and held his fist up, threatening that if he (complainant) drove it to the pound he would strike him. He also used other threatening language. Othei ■vidence was given of defendant having driven the cow away after the dog had .■based it. After counsel had addressed the Bench, his Worship sMd he considered t u ffnnee of rescuing proved, and would inflict i fine of £5; the other charge would be dismissed. Assault —lohn Lloyd was summoned for assailing Mary B. Lloyd. Neither of the parties appeared, and the charge was dismissed. Breaking Windows. The adjourned case of Herman Fuhrrnan and J. S. Wagner, for breaking windows, was called on. Mr George Harper, who appeared for Mr Fuhrman, admitted the offence of breaking the windows, but raised an objection as to the locus standi of Murphy, who had admitted having leased the house to Major Croker, by whom the injury as a tenant had been received, and he '(^ a j° r Croker) should have laid the information. Mr Harper then cited authorities to show that, under the circumstances of the case, the tenant or lessee was the only person who could bring the action. A civil action in this case had been brought by the tenant, who had already been awarded substantial damages. Dr Foster appeared for the complainant (Murphy), and Mr Joynt for Mr Wagner. Dr Foster having replied to Mr Harper’s objection, recapitulated the evidence that has already appeared in these columns, and said that when the case first came before the Court, it was not known whether Mr Wagner or Mr Fuhrmann had broken the windows. Now that Mr Fuhrmann had acknowledged having done so, he would ask the Court to withdraw the charge as against Mr Wagner, and when the acknowledgment from Mr Fuhrmann had reached him, he had communicated with Mr Wynn Williams of his desire to withdraw the information against Mr Wagner. He (Dr Foster) had personally seen the damage done, and considered the case one merely for compensation. Mr Joynt objected to the charge against his client being withdrawn, as Mrs Murphy had sworn positively that she saw Mr Wagner deliberately break the windows, kick the door, and call out to Major Croker. Now that it was found that there was not even the color of truth in her statement it was desired to have the case withdrawn. He had eight witnesses in court to prove that Mr Wagner was not near the door or windows at the time, and as the evidence already taken had been given publicity to through the papers to the injury of Mr Wagner, be would ask that the case be tried on its merits, and he (Mr Wagner) released from the imputation under which he at present lay. Mrs Murphy could not come there that day and stand the cross-examination to which she would have been subjected, and he would ask the Court to allow the case to go on as against his client. Dr Foster considered it was monstrous that after Mrs Murphy had been cross examined during the hearing of a civil case in that court, when Mr Wyun-Williams distinctly avowed that there was no incorrectness in the evidence given by her, and he (Mr Williams'! had asked him (Dr Foster) to withdraw the criminal charge against Mr Wagner, that such remarks should be then made by Mr Joynt. He had replied to Mr Williams that he would make further inquiries, and having done so, and found that there was no evidence against Mr Wagner, he now desired to withdraw the charge. A contention here took place between counsel, Mr Joynt contending that Mr Wynn-Williams was not authorised to ask for the charge to be withdrawn. His Worship said that at the hearing of the civil case, Mr Williams had asked Di Poster to withdraw the criminal charge, and Mr Wagner was bound by his actions. He would allow the charge to be withdrawn. Mr Joynt said he would take another course, as he would not allow evidence given by Mrs Murphy to go forth uncontradicted. Mr Harper, on behalf of Mr Fuhrmann, repeated his objection as to Mr Murphy having no locus standi in the case and read Dr Poster’s remarks on the occasion of the first hearing, when he stated his client’s willingness to accept an apology from Mr Fuhrmann. After Dr Foster had been heard contra, his Worship said he must decide against him, as he felt the point raised by Mr Harper fatal to Murphy, Under that objection the charge would be dismissed. [Left sitting.]