MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXXI, Issue 10273, 15 February 1894, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. Wednesday, Feb. 14. (Before Messrs H. Thomson and G. Henderson, J.P/s.) •Drunkenness. A first offender was fined 5s and costs, in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. Prohibition Order. John Keys Hdtheringcon, for whom Mr Franks appeared, applied for an order prohibitin g all licensed persona in Christchurch and suburbs from supplying him with intoxicating liquor for a period of twelve months. The order was granted. The Street Corner By-Law.— Robert Malcolm, John Tisch, William, Burko, Edmond Power, William Key, Charles Hoddinotfc, John Mather, John Milne, Charles Edward, Edward George Levinge, Charles Rose, Benjamin Drury and Mrs A. H, Turnbull were each fined Sa and costa 7s for driving vehicles at other than a walking paco over the crossings in the city prohibited by the City Council. Leonard Eowse was fined a similar penalty for riding a horse at other than a walking pace over one of the prohibited crossings.

LYTTELTON. Wednesday, Feb. 14. (Before Mr E. Boetham, R.M.) Civil Cases. —Cook Bros. v. James Hanson, claim £9 4s sd. Mr Nalder for defendant. Judgment for plaintiffs for amount of claim and costs.—Lyttelton Gas Company v. W. Malcolmaon and T. Lewis, claim ,£l3 Is 4d. Mr Nalder for plaintiff, Mr Wilding for defendants. This was a claim for tar supplied to the Lyttelton Lawn Tennis Club in 1886, and defendants were" sued in consequence of the fact that they now occupied the positions of honorary secretary and honorary treasurer of the club. Mr Nalder producsd a letter from defendant Malcolmaon, in which he practically acknowledged the debt, and promised to pay the amount as soon as the , funds of the club would' permit. Mr Wilding contended that there was no personal liability. At the time the debt was contracted neither of the defendants was even a member of the club, and be contended that if they were tbey wore in no respect liable for the transactions of the then committee. He quoted cases to this contention, and as the clKb was not a corporate body ho maintained that the plaintiffs must sue the parson who ordered the goods. Mr Nalder having replied, bis Worship said he would look into the various cases, and give his decision upon a future occasion.— J. Hayes v. W. Morris, claim £9 4s. Mr Nalder for plaintiff. In this case the amount of claim had been paid into court, but Mr Nalder applied for coats on the ground that the notice of such payment into court was not in form. He pointed out that such notice should be signed either by the defendant himself or bis solicitor, while the notice received bad been signed by an unauthorised person. Hia Worship said, taking ail the circumstances into account, be would allow the costs applied for, also witnesses’ expenses, as the witnesses had to be brought from a place where notice of the payment into court could not reach them in the interval between the time the money was paid and the sitting of the court. Committed to Burnham.— John Devine (aged ten years), Mary Jane Devine (aged seven years), Martha Ann Devine (aged five years) and Owen Devine (aged eleven months) were brought before the court under Section 16, Suh-aeetion 4, of the Industrial Schools Act. The evidence of W. J. Thompson and Constable Fitzgerald was to the effect that the mother of the children had died some short time ago in the hospital, and their father was of internperate habits. The children were not properly cared for. Hie Worship committed them to the Industrial School, and ordered the youngest child, which appeared in almost a dying state, to be examined by a medical man to ascertain if it was fit to undergo the journey.