MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXII, Issue 7282, 2 July 1884, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

*- CHBISTCBUBCK. TCESBAT, Jt'J.? 1. (Before B. Bestham, Esq., JIM., E. Wcatenra and F, J. Iviiuboll, Eso,b.) Djsckekskess.—A woman who failed to surrender to her bail was fined 10a for this effvneu. A ItowDT C'habacteb. —William John Wils&u vam acciu«il of having been drunk in KUuiorc street on tlto previous day, and of four other oifc-ncw* arising: out of the disorderly and violent xoanntar in which ho had behaved. It appeared ho had forcod hi* way into tlw house of a Mr Rainbow, whom ii« assaulted; ho also uinashed a looking glass and daciagwd a table, making havoc tu tbw extent of XI. Obsceno limguji^*. 1 wa* auuthiT of his offoaet*. Ac«u*«d said be l«d jjob* to the houjw to rfsit a woman there us hit had done froquentlytefore, when Rainbow camo in and! struck biai on tie head with a pieee of; wood. The Bench observed that there were several conviction* for similar offences Kscord«l against accused, and ho wsus suubmwd to two month*' hard labour. LaccesT.—Anne Mwlom, a middle-aged wouj&b, pk-adrsd guilty to a charge of »t#itl« i»# a jacket and a pair of stocking, value 41 ss, tho property of \v. E. Parker. She had been a servant in 5Jr Parker's houw, and was dUcluu-gfJ ia Ifcbraary bi*t. su»pkion pointing to lu?r, a *«irch of her box by Dowcttru Jones l«-. slight to light ttoa ttWng article. H'm appeared now to lm sorry, and to foul Iwr jxwiUon keenly. Mr Jaard, who apjx-nri-4 for her, pleaded for fcrnU-ucy, and said tliaUuuv genttetaaa. wa* willing U> take charit" of Iwr, The Bench could not Qr<;?!ouk the offtnuw, and »«n----tcnM'd prisoner to H days' Imprbujnnwnt, DtsKAiUtft* Houghton, ft girl of alxjut IS, *a* proved to have broken" a pan« of glsiAS in a greanhonM belonging to William 3>Jilla, and ordered to pay 8s <hl tlauiatfuaiandcu&td. lk-f<n<l&nt indignantly dwokd thi) often**, and whoa tht) Bench » oWLrfon wft* jj'lvt-n said" I never brokit It t if J had I would he ipiUe willing to pay for it, asd you can tike my body." Civil Cahw.~Judgment was giv«a for I plaintiff by default lu the cases of Lang* don and Judtfu v. Morgan, dalui M iHi 2d; l'avitt v. Ariiistrong, claim J!43 j B>,'rry v. Baldwin, MX 17s } Duncan v.

Platman, claim M 4«u KelMgr Bros v, Godfrey, plaint ,€fl 28.—The coses of Whitooinbe and Tombs v. Steberg, and Duncan v. Wilson, wer* adjourned to July B. Moriarty v. Minks, claim .£lO ltta 4d for (♦rnula supplied. £5 lft* had boon pfttd into Court, nun a «el;-off for JS3 lGs for the use of ft sheep dog Mod. Tho sot-off was not allowed, and Judgment was given for M t)« and cotto. Mr Klppeiiborger appeared for plaintiff) And Mr Stringer for defendant. Hasltius y. Parsons, claim JCB 12s Sri for rout. Judgment for amount nlntuicd and eo*U. Beck v. Stringer, claim Kta for expenses an a wlUunm for Aituttdinur In tho reuse of Murray v. Baker, in which defendant had noted w solicitor for plaintiff, on whoso behalf ho Intd given instructions for tho Issuo of tho rtHlijKVim to plaintiff. The IJonoh said Ihnt in sueh » case tho solicitor being only nn agent whoso prinuitml was disclosed, was clearly not liable. Plaintiff should sue the person on whoso behalf ho hud attended, and ho was not bound to attend on ft sub* prana in a civil ewe unlaw his expenses wo.ro toildorod him. Ju lament for defendant.

LYTTELTON. TUKHDAY, JWMf 1. (before 11. Allwright itnd J. T. Souse, Esqs.) BuKAcit or tuk Psacqe.—Dunoau Maekuchnlo was charged with being drunk, with fighting, and Assaulting tho police und damaging Constablo M'Cormick's uniform. Aceuiied pleaded ignorance of tho circumstances. Sergeant J. S. Mason, and Constables! Drake and M'Coiiuiek gave ovidouco. Tho man in one of tho crow of tho barque Firth of 01na, and was sentenced to my a tine of -10 s and tho value of the constable* n lint. Two of his shipmates, Richard Gilbert und Robert Franco, pleaded guilty to having Attempted to reaoue Mackechnio froi;a tho polico, and wore lined 40s each, or hi days' imprisonment. DiiUN-KKNNKBa.—Twofirst offenders wore fined 5s each for being drunk.

BANGIORA. TtIESDAT, JtJ« 1. (Before H. C. S. Baddeley, Esq., 8.M.) Uskbqibtekei) Doo.^—H. hceco was fined lOj, and ?s costs, for being the owner of an unregistered dog. Civil Cases.—A. Parsons v. J. (J. Hawkes, claim M 6s. Judgment, by default, for amount claimed and costs.—T. Dench v. A. Campbell, claim M,7a Od. Judgment for plaintiff for amount and costs.

TIMABU; Tuksoat, Jm,v 1. (Before J. Beswiek, Esq., 8.M., E. Acton and W. Bees, Esqs.) Pouch Cases.—C. Bull, for obscene language at Fairlie Creek, was fined 40s, or 14 days.—W, J. Towser, for using a tarpaulin belonging to the Kail way Department near Albury, was fined !0s and. costs.—A. F. Blanchett (nightman), for depositing filth below high-water mark, near Peeresstown, was fined 40s and costs. Civil Casks.—ln the following cases, judgmont went by default's—J. B. Stansell v, 8. Berry, claim £1 7s j T. Cain v. same, claim £26* 12s; Maclean and Stewart v. B. Lowe, claim J& t White and another v. Eeuben Smith (Captain in tho Salvation Army), claim £8 7a; Brunner Coal Company v, J. Keen, claim M Ss; Bowles and :inother r. F. Weldon, cbiim £2 10s; same v. H. S. Bourn, claim M7s Od.—J. K. Stansell v. Packman, claim J6l la 3d. Judgment by confession for the amount and cost?.—S. Bentley v. Oldfield, claim M 12a, for wages j judgment for plaintiff for amount, without cost*.—W. Be Gernon v. J. H. Barafield, claim Ml 6s, for clerical services. Mr Hawersley for plaintiff, Mr Fcr iter for defendant. Defendant is Secretary to the South Canterbury Board of Educntion,'.and an indefinite arrangement had been entered into between him and plaintiff for the performance of certain clerical work. claim hod not been recognised by the Board, and he now sued defendant. It transpired that tho agreement between the parties was entirely vague, and the Bench gave judgment for plaintiff for M, he to pay his own costs.—T. Begg and Co. v. F. Jones, claim £lO 19s; balance due on a piano. Mx Perry for plaintiff, Mr Hameraley for defendant. This was a eaao in which it was is dispute whether the agreement was for purchase or hire. His Worship now decided that it was for hire, and gave judgment for plaintiff, the amount to depend upon the result of a comparison of documents submitted by the parties.