MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 8122, 19 March 1887, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHEISTCHUECH. Thursday, March 18. (Before C. Whitefoord, Esq., E M.) Drunkenness] —A first offender, drunk in William street, was fined 5s and 2s 6d cab hire. Stephen Hosking, who was arrested at Fapanui an a charge of drunkenness, was remanded till Monday for medical treatment.

Alleged Forgery. —John Morris Willock was charged with forging a cheque on the Bank of New Zealand, Christchurch, for .£l4, and uttering the same on Henry George Sheppard on Feb. 14. Eobert Neil, detective, of Christchurch, said that on Feb. 15, at 9.30 p.m., he arrested the accused in Tuam street on the above charge. Prisoner admitted the offence, adding that on Monday last he was in the hotel, and told Mr Sheppard that the cheque was a forged one. Prisoner said that Detective O’Connor was there while he was there, and that Sheppard took him inside and told him to clear away. Prisoner said he had been drinking. Henry George Sheppard, sworn, said he was licensee of the Palace Hotel, Gloucester street. Accused came to the place on Saturday, Feb. 12, and said he wanted to stay. He stayed a short time, but incurred no liabilities. He offered the witness the cheque produced, asking him to change it. Advanced him £4s on it. Cheque produced, on the Bank of New Zealand, fori! 14; it purported to be signed by Cyril Mountfort. It was returned by the Bank, signature unlike. Accuse I came in on Monday, and wanted the balance of the money. Saw Mr Mountfort on the same day. To accused : Advanced you JB3 on Saturday and £1 on Sunday. You stayed at the hotel on Saturday night. Never asked you to shout a bottle of champagne. Told you you had better have your change on Monday, and go to where you were lodging at Sydenham. You said you had left there. Charles Sheppard: Took the cheque to the Bank on Monday, Feb. 14; presented it. It was returned. William Crayshaw, clerk at the Bank of New Zealand: The cheque was returned, as there was no account in the Bank to the name of Cyril J. Mountfort. George P. Whiteside, clerk to W. Strange and Co.: Saw accused at Strange and Co.’s on Saturday night. He asked for a blank cheque on the Bank of New Zealand. Witness produced the block of the cheque. Have no doubt it is the same man. He said it was for Mr Mountfort; Prisoner appeared to l«

under the influence of drink. Cyril Julian Mountfort, architect, living at Lin wood, said the accused had been in his employ. Dispensed with his services on March 1. Did not sign the cheque produced, nor did he authorise accused to sign it. There is no other person of that name in Christchurch. Accused, when cautioned, said he was under the influence of drink, and did not know what he was doing. He was then committed to take his trial at the next sittings of the Supreme Court. Civil Casks.—Bashford and Longden v. Kiddey, claim .£BS. Mr Weston for plaintiffs, Mr Stringer for defendant. The claim was for balance due on rent of certain booths at the Eifle Association’s meeting. William Longden said he and his partner were lessees of the ground at the recent rifle meeting. They called for tenders for certain booths. Mr Kiddey put in the tenders, which were accepted, and .£ls paid on account. Had applied to defendant for the balance, £35; he said he would pay no more. To Mr Stringer: He got the exclusive right. There was some sort of a row among the caterers; a man was allowed to sell oysters to the competitors. Did not sell a right for a barber’s shop, that was not included in the right of sports. To Mr Weston : Sold to Captain Somerville the right to the competitors’ canteen, and the right to Mr Kiddey for the public booths. Bashford said Mr Kiddey knew perfectly well that Bumip had the canteen. Burnip started an oyster saloon, but so far as witness knew he only sold to comnetitors. A man named Batcher was stopped selling oysters, and Mr Kiddey was recommended to stop selling tea and bread and butter. Witness gave Kiddey the tickets produced, and told him that people could not carry on sports for which Kiddey had bought the right, without having a ticket. Mr Stringer - said there must be a deed to give the right to go on the land, and quoted Wood v. Ledbitter, 13, Meeson and Wellslys’ reports, page 838. If defendant could be turned out at any moment, he conld also leave at any moment without payment of any more money. Mr Weston said it was not a question of easement, but how could they divide the amount due when they did not know the man had left. Bat the contract was performed as far as plaintiffs were concerned, and they did not turn defendant out. Defendant had had the enjoyment of the land, and must naturally pay for it. Mr Stringer said the only remedy was to sue for use and occupation. The Magistrate held that defendant, had he wished to stay, conld have tendered a deed. He stayed for four days, and then apparently left without rhyme or reason. Mr Kiddey said he understood that he had the solo right for the oyster saloon,, and went on the ground and found one going on at the canteen. He was also debarred from selling tea and bread and butter. Witness protested to Mr Bashford. He was prohibited on Sunday, and again on Monday, from selling tea and bread and butter. On Monday witness appealed to Mr Bashford to protect his rights, but the decision of the meeting held on Monday was upheld. Plaintiffs failed to upheld any of the rights sold to mm. To Mr Weston: He knew when they met at Bashford’s hotel that there was to be a canteen on the ground. The Bench considered that they should have to find against Kiddey, but thought that he had been rather hardly dealt with. He had been interfered with rather by the Bifle Association than by plaintiffs, first in regard to the sale by him of tea and coffee, and in regard to the sale of oysters by other persons. He should, in the opinion of the Bench, instead of clearing off the ground, have continued to sell the tea and coffee, and then have recovered damages from plaintiffs. Judgment for the amount claimed, less .£l2 10s paid for the right of selling oysters, and £2 the proceeds of the barber's shop sold to Hobbs, total £l4 10a; amount of judgment, £2O 10s and costs.— Mason, Strnthers and Co. v. G. B. Yanee and Co., claim £22 17s 2d. Judgment by default.—Walter Spring v. L. V. Desborough and Davis Tod, claim £25. Adjourned to March 25.—Florence Graham v. A. Stevenson, claim £lO. Mr Doubleday for plaintiff. Plaintiff, it appears, was defendant’s servant girl, and he had been in the habit of advancing her small sums in payment of accounts for millinery, clothes, dress improvers, &c., of which he kept an account. After hearing evidence, the Bench gave judgment for £6 lls 6d and costs.—John Armstrong v. J. Topham, claim £2 2s. Judgment for £1 10s 4d and costs.—Beid and Gray v. Annie Brandt, claim £2l Is 4d. Adjourned by application of plaintiff’s solicitor to March 25.—William Bountreev. G. Winter, claim £5 13s 9d. Judgment by default. Intebplkadkbs.—P. Henley v. Annie Brandt. Claimant, Henry Harrison. Mr Stringer for claimant, Mr Izard for plaintiff.—John Dalton v. Annie Brandt. Claimant, Henry Harrison. Mr Stringer for claimant; Mr Weston for plaintiff.—S. Chapman v. Annie Brandt. Claimant, H. Harrison. Mr Stringer for claimant j Mr Weston for plaintiff.—Samuel Early v. Annie Brandt. Claimant, H. Harrison. Mr Stringer for claimant, Mr Deacon for plaintiff. All these cases were adjourned to March 21, all parties agreeing to have the cases heard before Mr Beetham.

SOIJTBEIDGE. Friday, March 18. (Before E. Beetham, Esq., E.M., Captain Willis and J. E. Campbell, Esqs.) Cattle at Large. —For allowing horses and cattle to wander at large the following persons were each fined ss:—J. Moore, J. Britcliffe, Thomas Eowe, W. B. Burley and E. Condon. Trespassing on Crown Lands.—F. Overton was summoned for having, on Jan., 17, allowed sheep to trespass on section 959 without being licensed to do so, the same being a Government reserve. Mr J. Martin appeared for the Commissioner of Crown Lands, and Mr T. G. Enssell for defendant. This information had been laid under section 25 of the “Land Act, 1885.” The fact ef the trespass of from 1000 to 1200 sheep was admitted, but without wilful intention. Mr Martin asked for a substantial penalty if the Bench convicted, as otherwise it would pay farmers and others in the neighbourhood to allow their’ stock to trespass on any portion of the Lake Eeserve. Mr Hay, Government Surveyor, proved the trespass on the date mentioned, trigpole E was on this section. It was shown, for the defence, that Mr Overton, was the admitted lessee of a block of 367 acres of this reserve, and copy of telegram was produced from defendant to the Commissioner of Crown Lands, offering a rental for portion of the reserve on which trigpole E stood. As none of the reserve was fenced in, defendant believed he was using the portion which he had leased from the Crown and paid rent for. As soon as he found out that he was trespassing, he at once removed his sheep. The whole of the mistake had occurred through defendant not knowing the acreage of the portion which he had leased from the Crown, and being misled to some extent by an advertisement which had appeared from the Lands Department. After further evidence and remarks from counsel, his Worship said the opinion of the Bench was that no wilful trespass had been shown. Case dismissed, but without costs. Assault. —Duffy v. Blair. Mr Loughnon for complainant; Mr Bussell for defendant. This was a trumpery case, which the Bench said should never have been brought up. Case dismissed, complainant to pay costa.

Civil Cases. —Bladder v. Brady, claim £6 10s 6d. Judgment for plaintiff.—Bank of New Zealand v. Walker, claim £lß6sßd. Judgment for plaintiffs.—E. T. Webb v. South British Insurance Company, claim £75, for chaff-cutting machine. Mr Loughnan for'plaintiff; Mr Wynn-Williams for defendant. The particulars of the case were that bn Oct. 1 of last year plaintiff insured a chaff-cutter and bagging apparatus

with the defendant Company for £76. On Nov. 30 the elevator and apparatus were burnt, and also the combustible portion of the chaff-cutter, which was standing near the other machinery. Plaintiff gave notice of this to defendant, who wrote on Dec. 7 to say that the chaffcutter would be taken by them to Christchurch and repaired. On Dec. 9 plaintiff wrote back expressing his consent to have the chaffcutter reinstated, if the machine could be restored with the alterations he had made to it from the original value, at a cost of about .£4O, besides a new fly-wheel and spindle, damaged by the fire. The plaintiff added in his letter that, as he had to cut some chaff by a certain date, he would require to have the machine back the first week in January. The machine was not returned until the first week in February, and when it arrived plaintiff found that its construction had been so materially altered that he could not use it with his other plant, which had not been burnt. The bagging apparatus had also been mounted on the wrong side, and efome of the burnt iron of this apparatus had been reused. The arrangement of the machine was totally different to what it had formerly been, and under the whole circumstances, plaintiff refused to take delivery of the chaff-cutter. The old fly-wheel had been returned, but painted. After hearing the evidence, judgment was given for plaintiff, with costs. Eichards v. Desborough, claim £7 19s. Mr Bussell for plaintiff, Mr Loughnan for defendant. It was found that the whole of the ground in this case had been gone over on last Court day, and the Bench dismissed the summons with costs against plaintiffs.

SHEFFIELD. Thursday, March 17. (Before J. P. Jameson, A. D. M’llraith, and D. M'Millan, Esqs.) Assault. —William Watson was charged with assaulting Thomas Dorn, and a cross action was entered by defendant charging Davis with using abusive language calculated to provoke a breach of the peace. Both cases dismissed. Civil Cases. —H. Williamson and Co. v, George Jebson, claim 14a. Judgment for 16s, costs, 14s having been paid in.—A. H. Burkett v. Thomas Murray, claim £5 17s. Judgment by default for amount with £1 3s costs.—John Cresawell v. Joseph Strange, claim .£3. No appearance; case struck out. —James Carter v. James Smith, claim £1 2s ,3d. Judgment for amount with costs 12s, to be paid in three equal instalments within tbree months.—Williamson and Co. v. J. Smith, claim 19s 4d. Judgment by default for amount and costs 14a. —John Jebson, junr., v. Mary Ann Duggan, claim 11s 6d. Judgment for 7a 8d and costs 6a, William Duggan v. George Carter, claim £3 Is. Judgment for £2 15s with costs 6a.—George Carter v. Mary Ann Duggan, claim 3s 2d. Judgment for amount without costs. ASHBUETON. Friday, March 18. (Before H. C. S. Baddeley, Esq., EM.) Civil Cases. —Matheson v. Somers, claim £45 13a 9d, commission on sales of goods made by plaintiff, who bad been acting as manager for H. J. Wood and Co., at Ashburton. The hearing of this case and a cross action brought by Somers against Matheson occupied the greater portion of the day, and resulted in nonsuits in each case.—W. Sharp v. Lancaster, claim £4 15s 6d. Plaintiff nonsuited.—Bradshaw v. Jackson, claim £1 11s 6d. Judgment for amount claimed. M'Bae v. Breerton, claim £5. Judgment for amount.