MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXX, Issue 10213, 6 December 1893, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHETSTCHUECH. Tuesday, Dec. 5. • (Before R. Beetham, Esq., 8.M.) Civil Cases. Judgment by default, with coats, was given for plaintiffs ia the following casesCrothers Bros. v. A. 80110, claim £6 os; Collie Bros. v. T. G. Atkinson, £1 Os 9d; D. T. Clark v. J. Gardner and G. Macdonald, £8 Os 6d.— Fencrty and Buddie v. C. W. Hensley, claim £4l 3s 9d, judgment summons. Mr Lane for judgment creditor, Mr M’Connell for judgment debtor, who, in reply to questions, slated that he was a hotelkeeper at the Wheatshesf. He had leased the hotel since July, 1892, and paid £B4 a year in rent, payable in monthly instalments. The lease expired ia June, 1895. Paid last month’s rent £7 Is 8d on Monday last. Hie wife lent him £7O to start in business at the hotel. He bad no other property beside the lease of the hotel. His wife, who lived at the hotel, had a cottage which she rented at Lincoln. Did not know whether or not hia wife had money when he married her. She got the £7O for some property she sold. Had seven children, the youngest being five months old, and at present owed Wood, Shand and Co. £SO, and Mr A. Louieson £35. No order was made.— E. Vaughan v. J. Barrett, claim £9 8s 4d. Mr Cresswell for plaintiff 5 Mr Loaghnan for defendant, who paid £1 8a 4a into Court. Judgment was given for plaintiff for the amount paid into Court, each party to pay its own costs. —Crothers Brothers v. W. Crossan, claim £5 for goods supplied. Mr Cresswell for defendant, whoso defence was that be was adjudicated a bankrupt ia 1890. Plaintiffs said they had received no notice to that effect, and judgment was given for nlaintiffs with costs, 12h. Crothers Bros. v. W. Downing, claim £1 3a 2d, for goods supplied. Defendant paid £1 Oa 2d into Court. Judgment was given for plaintiffs for the amount claimed. (Before K. WWtcrrs,, J. M. Douglass, and K. Dobson, Eaqe.) Alleged Fokgeuy and Uttering. — William Gregory Ha'ilantyne was charged with having, on Dan. 4, forged the nemo of J. Ballautyne to a cheque for £6 10.'. on the Bank of New Zealand, and ut'o-sl the same to Henry Oakoy. On the spy •chi.oii of Inspector Broham the accu cd was remanded till Thursday next. Alleged Assault. —Joseph Farrell and John Mills (on remand) were charged with having grievously assaulted John Wilson oa Nov. 28. Inspector Broham conducted the case against the accused, for whom Mr Donnelly appeared. Dr MurrayAynsley deposed that on tho night of Nov. 28. Wilson was brought to the Hospital. He had a large scalp wound, exposing the bone of the skull; one tooth was knocked out and ono loosened; tho bone of his nose was broken, his right eye blackened and his face braised. Wilson also had several bruises on his right side. Witness was certain that a fall on the pavement would not occasion tha bruises oa the body, though kicks would have caused them. The injury to his mouth and face would probably be caussd by the blows nf r- ri=u. Tho wound oa the. beck of tho head might have boon caused either by a fall on the pavement or by a kick. The prosecutor was afcill an inmate of the Hospital. To Mr

Donnelly: The man was now practically out o£ danger. John Wilson, the prosecutor, deposed that on the night of Nov. 28 he saw the two accused at the Caverabam Hotel about five minutes to eleven. They were going to play billiards, but as it was nearly eleven o'clock, witness took the balls off the table. On going into the passage Farrell hit witness two or three times on the head. They went outside and Farrell hit witness again, knocking him down. While witness was getting up. Mills kicked him in the mouth. Witness could not remember any more till Constable Batnsay put him into a cab. He had done nothing to provoke the accused. To Mr Donnelly: It was not true that witness only received one blow from Farrell’s fist. Though he was hit five or six times by Farrell, witness did not once raise his hand against the accused. Arthur Hudson corroborated the evidence of the last witness as to the assault. Gertrude Lodge also stated that she saw part of the assault, and she saw Farrell bit’ Wilson once on the footpath, and knock him down. This concluded the evidence for the prosecution. The Bench said that they intended to deal with the case summarily. Mr Donnelly addressed the Bench, after which he called Mills, who said that on the night mentioned ho and Farrell went into tho Oaversham Hotel and asked Mrs Bavenhill if they could have a game of billiards. She said, “Yes.” They were putting the balls on the table, when Wilson came in and took them away. They both went out and Wilson followed them. On the footpath Farrell and Wilson were shaping at one another. Witness only saw Farrell hit Wilson once. Witness did not strike Wilson. Farrell corroborated Mills' evidence, stating that it was nntrue that he had hit Wilson inside the hotel, James Hughes gave corroborative evidence. H. foreman for Messrs Toomer Bros,, gave evidence as to Farrell's character. The Bench said that as far as the case was concerned. Mills could stand out, as there was a very grave doubt, and he would get the benefit of it. Farrell would be fined £3 and costs of the Court, half the fine to go to the complainant.

EANGIOEA. Tuesday, Dec. 5. (Before IL W. Bishop, Esq., R.M., E. B. Good, A. Parsons, A, Todd and J. L. Wilson, Esqs.) Civil Cages. —J. N. Biasfeld and othera v. A. C. Clarkson and Co., claim JBI4 9a lid. Mr Cathro, for defendants, submitted to judgment for plaintiffs with coate.—E Hie and Reeves v. C. Teague, claim £6 18s 6d judgment summons. Mr Helmore tor plaintiffs. Defendant was ordered to pay the amount within a month, in default sir weeks’ imprisonment, order to ho suspended while lOajper week is paid.—W. Manhira v. E. Hill, claim 6s 6d, for quarter-cord wood. Mr Cathro for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed. North Canterbury Saleyards Company v. J. Torrens, claim £2, for calls ou shares. Mr Helmore for plaintiffs. Judgment was given by default. An AtrcTiONEEE’s Case. —A. P. Tutton v. W. F. Joynt, claim £2 7s 6d. Mr Helmore for plaintiff, Mr Cathro for defendant. In this case the evidence was taken before the Justices on a previous Court day, and an adjournment was arranged to permit of argument on a legal point to the effect that plaintiff had no power to sue, defendant being his servant, before the Resident Magistrate. His Worship took time to look into the law on the point raised, and said that should he not decide to grant a nonsuit, the Justices who heard the evidence had already agreed to give judgment for the plaintiff tor 17s 6d.