MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXVI, Issue 9510, 4 September 1891, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, Sept. 3. (Before K. Beetham, Esq., E.M., E. Wostenra, H. J. Hall, and A. Tod, Esqs.) Maintenance Cages,— Thomas Henderson was charged with deserting his wife, Elizabeth Henderson. Mr Martin appeared for the complainant, who stated that her husband drank, used bad language towards her, and ill-treated her. As both her arms had been broken she could not work. The Bench ordered the defendant, who did not appear, to pay complainant 10s a week, and find a surety of £SO; or, in default, go to gaol for three months. —Peter Olsen was charged with failing to obey an order of tho Court to pay 10s a week towards tho support of his wife, Margaret Olsca, being £1 in arrears on August 34. Ho was sent to gaol for one month with hard labour.—On tho application of a Mrs Toghill, two destitute boys, Henry Adams (nine), and George Adams (four), were committed to the Burnham Industrial School, to be educated in the faith of the Free Methodist Church,

Civil Cases. —Judgment was given for plaintiff by default in the following cases : —Hobbs and Co. v. Forster, £7 Is 10d; Morton Anderson v. Grainger, £2 17s ; same v. . Poison, £l3 Os Gd; same v. Leggatt, £3 3d; same v. Ford, 15s ; Percy v. Cox, 10a j Trent Bros v. M'Fariane, £74 6s; Teremakau Quartz Mining Company, Limited, v. Brown, £3; Wood and Laurie v. Becks, £2 lls Gd; Cauldwell v. Hurcomb, £4 3s. —Morton Anderson v. Watson, £2 11a 6d; adjourned to Sept. 10.—Lowry v. Bonuington, £100: adjourned to Sept. 17.—Morrie v. Pavey, £SO 14a; adjourned to Sept. B. Slater v. Mathews, £l3 5a lOd; judgment summons; adjourned to Oct. 15. —Wilhelm Schmidt v, William Wilson, claim £lO. Mr Beatty for plaintiff, M.r Hoban for defendant. Plaintiff, an hotel-keeper, said that a fence had to ha erected between his premises and those of a man named Buchanan, for whom Wilson was agent. Oa Fob. 24, 1837, witness gave Wilson a receipt for £lO, Buchanan’s share of tho cost of tho fence, on Wilson promising that he would pay him the money next morning. This he did not do, and witness had never yet received the money. Witness had spoken to him frequently about the affair, and Wilson always promised to pay him when ho had settled with sßuchanan. Cross-examined: Wilson was not now Buchanan’s agent. Hugh O’Brien: Was in Schmidt’s Hotel on Feb. 24, ISS7, when the receipt was given, and heard Wilson say he would send or bring the money down next day. William Wilson, defendant: Paid the money to Schmidt at the time the receipt was given. He was under the impression that the payment v/as made by cheque. Never gave Schmidt a promise that ho would pay tho money. O’Brien was telling a lie when he said so. J. Brooks, bookkeeper to defendant: Made the entry of the payment of the £lO to Schmidt in the account book produced, from the receipt shown him by Wilson. Judgment for defendant.—C. T. Dudley v. James Kinloy, claim £49 5s 9d. Mr Beswick for plaintiff; Mr Martin for defendant. Plaintiff, a commission agent, claimed for commission on the sale of a property alleged to have been made through a sub-agent of his, to a man named Treleaven. It was stated for the plaintiff’s case that he agreed to share the commission with an agent named George Wright, and that it v/as through his influence that tho property was sold, and that two days before Kiuley withdrew tho property from King and Co.’a hands, plaintiff heard of the sals to Treleaven. G. Wright: Was in the employ of King and Go. Saw Treleaven and King at their office on Dec. 13, when the sale was talked about. He arranged to share the commission with Dudley. After Jan. 10 ho had conversations with Treleaven about tho land. James Kinlsy : Placed the land in King’s hands for sale, and told Wright that Treleaven wanted some land. Afterwards withdrew the land from King’s hands because they could not sell it. W. Treleaven :It was E. E. Wilson who spoko to him about tbe land first. The first time he saw AVright was when he went to King’s office and saw the plan. Then offered £2O an acre for the land, which was refused. Did not think that AVright ever again spoke to him about the land. Kiuley brought about the purchase himself. AVhen he bought the land he told Kirdey that he would have to pay King and Co, a commission, and he replied that ho had withdrawn the land from their hands. Tho case was adjourned sine die for argument. —The following cases were adjourned to Sept. 7 :— Sopp v. Hardingham, 7s Gd ; same v. Columbus, £2 I4s; Hedgman v. Parker, £llßs 6d jJ. Ashbourne v. Jewett, £7 3a 6d.

AMBSRLEY. Thursday, Sept. 3. (Before J. Innea and W. S. Smith, Eaqs.) Licensing Act.— A prohibition order was granted against James Dwann, to have force” in the Amberley town district and AVaipara licensing district. ASHBURTON, Thursday, Sept. 3. (Before 0. A. AVray, Esq., R.M.) Civil Cases. —Sandoe v, J. Nixon. Mr Cuthbertson, for plaintiff, applied for an order to v&ry tho judgment given in this case last week. Aa detendaat had to support his mother, fataor aim eight children with his earnings, the order was not granted.—ln. tho following cases, judgment was given for plaintiff by default.— Ross v. Stevenson, claim £3 13s Gd; A. Orr v. W. Young, claim £S os 4d.