RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 859, 17 August 1888, Page 24

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., delivered judgment at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday week in the case of Luke and Sons v Jillett, in which the sum of £SB 2s 6d was claimed by the plaintiffs for wages and material in connection with some work done for the defendant at Pauatahanui. Of the amount claimed, the sum of £25 had been paid into Court. His Worship Btated that, on examination of the evidence, he found that the long account of time charged in the account was not proved, and he should therefore make a sort of guess, as there certainly was a considerable amount of work done, and the question remained whether the quantity of work exceeded the value of the amount paid into Court. It was impossible for him to say whether the drilling, casting, turning, etc., were correctly charged in the account. He had therefore to fall back on the expert evidence. The experts called for the defence had estimated the value of the work (irrespective of the pump) at £ls, but, upon being pressed, they had admitted that *their estimate was based on the hypothesis that the job should be a straightforward one, devoid of the difficulties which appeared in the present case. He did not bind himself to the estimate of the experts in the case, but would strike what he considered to be an equitable average, and he would therefore give judgment for £25 without costs, allowing the plaintiffs to retain the pump, which it appeared in evidence they held, and of which the defendant was indifferent whether or not he obtained possession. Before Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M,, in the Magistrate’s Courtlast Friday morning, a first offender for drunkenness 'was dealt with in the usual manner. For a similar offence Wm. Thompson was fined 10a or 24 hours’ in default. The youth Alexander Hausmann was charged on remand with having received two pairs of skates, well knowing the same

to have been stolen. AfteS Wife fevldonce of Detective McGrath hh'd been takou, the accused Was teriSrindoA until Monday next. In the civil case, Wellington Loan Company y. Joseph Cottrell, a claim of £55, the plaintiff Was non-suited, with costs £5 10s. Mr Gray appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Chapman for the defendant. *' Before Messrs J. Dransfield and S. Collins, Justices, in the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Saturday, a first offender, for drunkenness, wn.3 fined 5s and 2s cab hire, or in default 24 hours’ imprisonment. For being drnnk while in charge of a horse and oart, Deni 3 Kelly was fined 10s, or in default 48 hours’ imprisonment. Patrick Burke, charged with drunkenness, was also fined. A second charge against the same prisoner, of having stolen a bottle of sauce from a coffoe stall in Harbourstreet, was dismissed. James Gaffney, aha 3 Lee, alia3 Grey, pleaded not guilty to a charge of having stolen a dolman, value £l, the property of some person unknown. After Dotectivo Okrystal had given evidence the accused was remanded until this morning, in order that an effort might be made to discover the owner of the article. In the civil case, Dwan Bros. v. Mrs Browning, claim £5 10s, judgment was given for plaintiff for the amouut claimed and costs.

Joseph Simmons, who ha 3 for some time past been in the employ of Henry Flockton, was charged in the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Monday with the larceny of 4s, said to have boon stolen on the 11th August. Mr Jeliicoe was pieseut for the prosecution, and Mr Skerrett appeared for the defence. The evidence was to tho effect that certain moneys having been missed some coins were marked, and one of these, a halferown, was paid by the accused to the prosecutor. Mr Skerrett asked that the case might go to a jury. Mr Jelliooe stated that if his Worship dealt summarily with the case he would be satisfied that the matter should be put in the hands of the Probation Officer. His Worship decided to commit the accused for trial. Bail was allowed the accused-—himself in one amount of £SO aud two sureties of £25 each.

Stephen Olliver was charged at the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Monday afternoou before Mr H. W. Robinson, with fading to provide for the support of his wife and seven children. Mrs Olliver, who was put in the box, stated that her husband had not given her more than 10s for the past month, and very frequently she and the children were without food. He was a bricklayer’s labourer, and was in the habit of giving way to intemperance. William J. Foster, clerk to the Melrose Borough Council, thought that if the man got a chance he would probably work fqr his wife arid family. The woman was receiving rations from the Melrose Council, for which the accused was expected to do work equivalent to the value thereof. His Worship adjourned the case for a fortnight to give Mr Foster time to report as to whether the accused would work out the value of the rations, remarking at the same time that it was no satisfaction to him to send the man to gaol, and if he was inclined to work for the value of the rations the end desired by all parties would be gained. At the Resident Magistrate’s Court Monday, before Mr H. W. Robinson, two first offenders brought up for drunkenness wore discharged. Richard Williams for being drunk and disorderly was fined 40s, with the alternative of 48 hours’ imprisonment. William Sandbrook was charged with having assaulted Arthur Gladinan Smith on Saturday evening outside the Branch Hotel. His Worship considered the charge proved, and inflicted a sentence of 14 days’ imprisonment with hard labour. Robert Johnston, a youth, who was charged with having stowed away aboard of the Waihora on her last trip from Sydney to Wellington, was ordered to pay £5, the amount to go to the Union Company, with the alternative of one month’s imprisonmeat. A charge against Alexander Hausmann of being the receiver of a pair of skates, knowing the same to have been stolen from one Lewis Lyons, was dismissed. The remanded charge against James Gaffney, alias Grey, alias Lee, of having stolen a dolman, valued at £l, was called for hearing, and was further remanded to the 20th. Bail was allowed In one surety of £2O. Richard Hall was charged by William Foster with removing a quantity of soil, to wit, a cartload of material from Derwent-street, Island Bay, on the sth July. The information was dismissed. A similar charge against Robert Churnside was withdrawn. A charge was brought against Robert Riddick of failing to comply with a maintenance order for payment of 7s 6d per week for the support of his illegitimate child. The arrears amount to £llos. His Worship dismissed the case. A charge against George Richard Saxby, of having ill-treated his wife Elizabeth on the sth August, was also dismissed. The Magistrate’s Court was presided over on Tuesday morning by Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M. Two first offenders for drunkenness were mulcted in the usual penalty. A charge against George Adams of having bean drunk and disorderly, was considered proved, and he was fined 10s, or in default, 24 hours’ imprisonment. A further charge against him of having broken six glasses, valued at 4s, was withdrawn. Patrick Nolan, a fireman employed on the steamer Ruapehu, was charged with having used obscene language in a public place, and was sentenced to 12 hours' imprisonment. and ordered to pay 2s cab hire. For having damaged a pane of glass belonging to Samuel Evans, the same person was fined 53, and ordered to pay the value oE the glass 3s, or in default 24 hours’ imprisonment. Allan John Gibson and Honry Luther were charged with the robbery of a cash box and £2O in money, the property of Mary Moynihnn, of the Queen’s Hotel. On the application of Chiof-Debective Browne, his Worship remanded the accused till Friday next. Bail was allowed eaoh of the accused in one surety of £SO, and another surety of £25. Judgment was delivored in the Resident Magistrate’s Court, on Tuesday morning, by Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M,, in the case of Brany v. Pearce. Mr Izard appeared for the plaintiff, arid Mr Jeliicoe for the defence Tins case was one in which the plaintiff sued tho defendant for £OO, as damages for tho destruction of two sheep-

dogs. It appeared that the defendant had laid poison for dogs on his own land, aud that tho plaintiffs dogs wore found dead under suoh circumstances as to lead to the conclusion that they had died by poison. The defendant admitted laying tho poison, but stated that it was . for a half-sporting dog belonging to a neighbour Darned Gardner, and not for the plaiutiff’s sheep-dogs. It had not been shown exactly where the poison had been laid, but the evidenco went to show that it could not have been within three chains of any highway, nor within a mile of the property of the plaintiff. Defendant bad given no notice of poison being laid on his land, which is intersected by three public roads. The dogs were registered, but had no collars on. His Worship held that, having considered the whole of the evidence, there must be a nonsuit at common law. There did not appear to have been anything to prevent a man from laying poison or setting traps, &c , on his own land, so long as ho did not bait them with strong smelling meats to entice animals on to his land to their destruction. He quoted at length the statutes bearing on tho case. Ho did not think tho intention as ag inst Gardner’s dog in particular could bo imputed as actual malice such as liad been said would “aggravate unlawful acts and make most lawful acts unlawful.” , He held that tho mere admission of tho intention that Gardner’s dog should be killed could not be taken to go further than this : That if Gardner’s dog came it might be killed as well as any other, tho poison being laid' for dogs in general. It was also worth noting that by section 13 of the Dog Registration Act, ISBO, dogs without collars having proper regulation labels might be destroyed by any person upon whose land they may be fouud. This also, his Worship thought, would be a good ground for a nonsuit. He therefore grantod a nonsuit with costs £6 17s. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs, was given by Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M.," on Tuesday, in the following oases :—Wellington Loan Company y Edmund B. Jupp, £8 ss, aud costs 11s ; Chapman and Fitz Gerald v Thomas A. Bennett,' £5 10a, and costs 11s ; Wilson and Richardson v A. H. Bill, £3 Is, and costs 7s; William Foster v Arthur Vincent, £6 12s, and costs 10s ; W. Mitchell v C. llan3on, £l2, and costs £1 Is (to be paid within two mouths) ; P. Shannon v Henry Roberts, £5, and costs 63. In the case of Mclntyre v George Jackson, claim £2 Bs, an order was made that the debtor pay the amount within seven days, or in default four days’ imprisonment ; and in the civil .action, Murray, Roberts, aud Co. v Thomas H. Hill, claim £l3 3s, an order was made for payment of the amount within 14 days, with the alternative of 14 days’ imprisonment. His Worship, in the case E. Barling v C. Maloney, claim £l2 .for wages, heard the evidence for the plaintiff, and decided to adjourn the ease. Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., heard evidence in the Magistrate’s Court on Tuesday afternoon in the civil action Cumming3 and Page v. E. Seager, in which the sum of £7 Is 3d was claimed for wages and work done. Mr Jeliicoe was present on behalf of the plaintiff, and Mr Brown appeared for the defence. His Worship reserved judgment. Messrs S. R. Dransfield, A. W. Fulton, and J. Dunne, Justices, presided at the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Tuesday. For ieaving thoir vehicles unattended, Robert Williams and Walter Edmonds were each fined 5s and costs 7s. For having allowed the chimney of his house to take fire, Allan Whitfield was fined 5s and costs 7s; for driving round a street corner at other than a walking pace, Arthur Briggs was fined 5s and costs 7s. Andrew Moran and James Cate, for keeping unregistered dogs, were each fined Is and 9s co3ts. The latter defendant was also charged with allowing certain offensive matter to bo kept in his back yard, and on this charge he wus fined 10s and costs 9s. For carting without license, Richard Thacker was fined 2s 6d and costs 7s. A charge against Daniel Palmer of having broken a window, value 10s, the property of Mr J. Hayes, was dismissed. William Herdman, charged with hawking without a license, was fined 2s 6i and costs 7s. Another charge against the same defendant of having used threatening language toward A. G. Johnson, Inspector of Licenses, was dismissed. A fireman belonging to the Ruapehu was charged with having wilfully damaged a window, value £l, the property of Patrick Spillane. Tho accused was fined 5s and ordered to pay 15s damage, or in default 7 days’ imprisonment. Thomas Underhill and Thomas Kelly, charged with having behaved in a mariner calculated to provoke a breach of the peace, were each lined £l, or in default 48 hours’ imprisonment.