MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVIII, Issue 18413, 20 May 1920, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

CHRISTCHURCH. Mr V. G. Day, S.M., presided at yesterday’s sitting of the Magistrate s Co*art. „ , _ . 4 A first (offender was fined ss, in dofault twentv-four Lours’ imprisonment David Victor Gregorsou, tor wliom Mr R. A. Cnthbert appeared, was charged with the theft on April 26 or goods valued at £7, the property ot Death and Co. A further charge was preferred of the theft during the past twelve months of crepe do chines, suitings, silks and dress materials, amount ing in value to £265 17s 6d, the property of the same firm On the application of the polico a remand was granted until Friday, bail being allowed as previously. ... , Frank Harper pleaded not guilty to a charge of the theft of a quantity ol potatoes, valued at 3s, which had been picked up by his two nephews from a plot of ground in South Dark, sown for the benefit of Christ s College for the benefit of Christ’s College sports fund. After hearing the evidence the Magistrate remarked that potatoes lying in a paddock would not be picked up by small boys for their own amusement. They were only likely to do such a thing at the instigation of some other person. Accused would bi convicted and fined 20s and costs, m default sovtm days’ imprisonment. A charge against Stanley Henderson of having made a false declaration under “The Dogs Registration Act, 1908,” was dismissed. A charge against William Evans of having used threatening behaviour was dismissed, it being held that the offence was committed under provocation. Silas James Macalister appeared charged with the theft of twenty-four rabbit skins, valued at £5, tho property of R. St Clair MacKonzie. He was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence when called upon, provided that lie stays for six months at the Salvation Army Home. Henry Alsop (Mr H. K. M’Dougall) was charged on tho information of Daniel Palmer with tho thoft of a quantity of fencing material, valued at ss, from his barrow, while standing in a public road After evidence had been heard tho Magistrate said that the case vms one in which it was evident that both patios had been at loggerheads for some time. He thought that when tho police knew of the existence of such a feud they should leave the parties to settlo the matter for themselves, instead of bringing it to Court. Tho charge of theft would bo dismissed.

Reserved judgment was delivered by Mr S. E. M’Carthy, S.M., in the case Payntor and Hamilton, Ltd. (Mr K. M Gresson) v. Mrs A. Leo (Mr A. M. Wright), claim £95 18s 2d, balance of money alleged to be owing for work done by tho plaintiff company pursuant, to a written agreement, contracting to build a cottage, and also for certain extras done at tho request of tho defendant. Judgment stated that where there is a contract to build a cottage for a fixed price and provision is made for extras and progress payments to the contractor on account of the whole contract, such a contract is entire and indivisible, and notwithstanding the payment of progress moneys, if a substantial part of the work to be done remains incomplete, the contractor is not entitled to recover any disputed balance of moneys. The plaintiff company, having in this case refused to complete the roof within the meaning of the contract, is not entitled to recover any portion of tho money sued for. It is possible, however, for the roof still to be completed, and the plaintiff company is non-Buited accordingly, and ordered to pay defendant’s costs. (Before Mr S. E. M’Carthy, S.M.) George James Cullen, twenty years of age, for whom Mr K. M. Gresson appeared, was charged on remand with having stolen at Christchurch on April 28, the sum of £ll, the property of Gladys Don. A further charge of the theft on the same date from Frank Donald Firmstone, of a purse containing £1 10s in money, and a 1914-15 Gallipoli star, of a total value of £2, was also preferred Mr H. K. M’Dougall appeared on behalf of witnesses in the case. Accused pleaded not guilty. Accused was convicted on both charges and ordered to come up for sentence when called upon, providing that he remained on his father’s farm for two years. Restitution would have to be made of £9 nnd 30s respectively, and accused was ordered to pay the expenses of both prosecutions.