R.M. COURT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1032, 11 December 1891, Page 29

R.M. COURT.

Two sailors from the ship Largo Law —-Win. A. Fisher and Geo. James—pleaded guilty at the Magistrates Court yesterday week to charges of drunkenness, disorderly conduct, and damaging a wiudow at Barrett’s Hotel the previous niaht, and were each fined, by Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., 5s or 21 hours' imprisonment. It was proved that the actual damage to the window had bem done by Fisher, and he was ordered to pay 253 damage, or three days’ imprisonment. At the Magistrate’s Court on Friday, Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., granted Mary Duncan, wife of James Dunoan, a publioan, a married woman's property protection order, the husbaad having to pay £2 13s 2d, the oost of the proceedings. A case in which Thomas and Ewen Coleman were sued by their brother tor the partial maintenance of their mother was adjourned to 15th December. At the Magistrate’s Court last Friday afternoon, before Mr Robinson, R.M., aud Messrs Cudby and Rawson, J’s.P., the case of J. Sunnex v. J. Dalton, which had been adjourned from the Lower Hutt Court, was concluded, and judgment given. The case arose in consequence of the action of the defendant in seizing a horse and oow, and two guns, the property of the plaintiff, under a distress warrant issued by the defendant upon an alleged claim of £l2 for rent. The goods being sold, the plaintiff prooeeded against the defendant for wrongful Beizure and sale, claiming £49 6s as damages. The defendant endeavoured to justify the sale of the goods by setting; up a ton&ncy on the part of the plaintiff of a farm in the Upper Hutt, and a claim for rent in respect of the same. This, however, be failed to establish, and judgment was given for the plaintiff for £22 17s, and costs £4 Is. Mr Bunny appeared for the plain tiff, and Mr Haßeldeu for the defendant. There were no fewer than eight oases of drunkenness dealt with at the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Saturday by Messrs J. Dunn and J. Dunoan, Justices, the chief case being that of Frederick Arnold, an old offender, who went to gaol for two days in default of paying a fine of 40s. At the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Men lay, before Mr H. W. Robinson, R. M., judgment went by default in favour of the plaintiffs in the following undefended civil oases :-M. O’Flaherty v. W. Tanner, £9, costs 10s ; Wilkins and Field v. J. L. Thompson, £2l 12s 6d, coats £1 11s ; Stewart and Co. v. F. Craig, £49 2s, coats £2 4s ; W. Nathan and Co. v. A. Gibson, £2 11s, costs 7s; S. J. Green v. F. W. Packer, £2 14s, costs 6s ; Stewart and Co. v. D. Darke and J. Fowler, £72, costs £2 10a, la two judgment summon cases

brought by E. J. Riddiford against W. N. Jacobs, olaiming £2 Us and £7 9s 6d, his Worship made no order. The immediate summons case brought by Chas. Vincent Magee against Mr and Mrs Hugo, for £l3 17s 9d, adjourned from the previous afternoon, came before Mr C. C. Graham, R.M. on Tuesday morning. Mr Coates represented the plaintiff, and Mr Skerrett represented Mrs Hugo, Chas. Hugo not being present or represented. The plaintiff deposed that Mrs Hugo had engaged him at £2 a week, and he had always looked upon her as managing the show, besides which Mr Hugo had repeatedly told him that such was the case. In cross examina* tion. witness said he thought that Chas. Hugo was merely a paid performsr, and that his wife was proprietress and manageress. He had not taken these proceedings on the prompting of Mr Hugo to prevent her from leaving the Colony. The oaae against Mrs Hugo was then withdrawn, and judgment was given against the other defendant for the amount claimed, with costs amounting to £2 Us. Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., presided at the Magistrate’s Court on Tuesday. One first offending drunk was discharged ; another, who did not answer to his bail, waa fined 10a or 24 hours’ imprisonment, and Geo. Jones, who had been previously convicted, was fined 10s or 24 hours’ imprisonment for a similar offence. Geo. Midgley, carpenter, was summoned for assaulting Geo. Hancock, a dairyman. Mr Skerrett appeared for the complainant. It appeared that the defendant, who thought his wife was insnlted by being asked to Battle an account, went to complainant’s shop, knooked him down, and kicked him. He was fined 53, and £2 2s costs, and also ordered to enter into hi 3 own recognizances of £lO to keep the peace for two months, ia default to go to prison for five days. He was allowed till Saturday to find the money.