MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2253, 22 June 1881, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. Wednesday, June 22. [Before J. Nugent Wood, Esq., E.M., and R. Westcnra, Esq., J.P.] Wipb Desbbtion. —Edward Rule was charged with this offence. Mr Spackman for plaintiff and Mr Stringer for defend ant. Mrs Rule stated that her husband, after beating her, had left her and her children, and had remained away for three months. She now applied for an order for her maintenance by him. Defendant said that, on great provocation, ho had struck his wife, and she then left on her own accord. He had since liberally supplied her with money, on an average £2 per week, and was still willing to maintain her in comfort. Plaintiff denied having received anything near tho amount accused had stated. In reply to the Bench, defendant said he was willing to give his wife another trial. His Worship said he thought she had had trials enough, and ordered him to pay 25s per week to his wife for tho support of herself and children and to pay coats and solicitor’s fee. Bubniiam School Children. Emily Smith, a girl of fourteen years of ago, was, on tho application of tho police, recommitted to tho Industrial School for one year from date.

LYTTELTON. Wednesday, June 22. [Before Joseph Beswick, Esq., B.M.] A Neglectful Paeent.— Samuel Northoy was called up for not contributing to the support of his child in tho Industrial School. Bo had been ordered to pay 5» per week in November last, and the police reported that he was now in constant employment, and had been for some time. He had paid but a few shillings since the order of the Court was made. The defendant failed to put in an appearance, and at the request of the police the case was adjourned until Friday. Oitil Business.— Harris v T. Mclntosh, claim £3 Os 6d, balance of wage*. Mr Nalder

for plaintiff, Mr Joyce for A receipts showing that plain! iff had received the balance duo to him was put in by defendant. Plaintiff swore that hi* engagement was for 25s per week ; but the defendant’s receipt showed the engagement at the rate of 20j per week. Judgment was given for the defendant, with costs.