MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1249, 6 February 1896, Page 19

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Our Peatherston correspondent writes: " At the Magistrate's Court on Monday morning George Cooper was charged on remand with having wilfully set fire to the Rioters' Retreat at Tauherenikau on January 22nd. Mr J W. Card, who appeared for the aceused, asked for an adjournment until Tuesday, 11th inst., so as to allow the accused to get up his defence and get counsel. This was agreed to. the same hail being allowed as before. I hear that Mr Skerrett, of Wellington, is to be retained for the defence." Judgment in the ventilating shaft case was given by Mr Martin, S.M., on Tuesday. His Wor.-hip held that the Sanitary By-law was good, and with regard to the main point, viz., that it was bad because the means prescribed by the by-law for ventilating the private drains were really made the means for ventilating the main sewers, he did not think that was a ground for upsetting the by law. The engineers who gave evidence all deposed that some system of ventilation for the private drains was necessary, and that the system adopted was a proper system. The strongest evidence against it was that given by Mr Maxwell, who said it was a proper scheme of ventilation, but would not advise it was a proper .scheme in every case, fi s the C orporatiou had applied a proper scheme, he did not think, if there was any abuse of the by-law, that the remedy was to upset the bylaw. He supposed the defendant wished to take the case to a hi her Court, and as it was a test question he woul 1 impose a nominal penalty of Is, with £i 19s costs. Mr T F. Martin, City Solicitor, nppeared for the Corporation, and Mr Edwards, for tho defence, stated that he intended to appeal. Sitting in civil jurisdiction on Tuesday, Mr Martin, S.M., entered up judgments for plaintiffs in the following civil cases : —J. Smith v. J. H. Carroll, £5 ss, costs £1 lis o'd; J. Mowatt v. A. H. Kumeroa, £G 10s, costs .£2 4s Gd ; Commerciil Agency v. A. Backhouse, .£1 17s lid, costs Gs; Butterworth Bros., Limited, v. J. Nelson, .£23 3s 2d, costs .£3 Is Gd : Commercial Agency v. G. H. Baylis, 15s, costs 7s ; J. Cross v. Ah Gee, .£3 14s 3d, costs 6s. Judgment summonses—W. R. Cook v. Natali Lenzini, defendant ordered to pay £3 16s foithwith or to go to gaol for nine days ; Pringle and Reid v. P. Kearney, defendant ordered to pay £9 8s 2d forthwith or to go to gaol for 21 days ; E. W. Mills and Co. v. L. G. West, defendant ordered to pay ,£2l 17s Gd forthwith or to go to gaol for six weeks ; C. A. Annison v. P. Kearney, defendant ordered to pay .£3 lis Gd forthwith or nine days' imprisonment in default. Defended cases —C. A. Annison v. J. Mills, claim £9 15s, judgment for plaintiff for that anT&mrUita 10s costs ; W. J Scott v. T H Walsh, claTm-a& l? d S™ cn ? for , defendant withal 7s costX^v Hl l ldl ? ar3i l^PP ( ! ar( i d for plaintiff and Mr Ske^£ fct L f( £' defendant. Abbott, Oram and Co. v. D>*^ arrett ' claim

.■64619 s lid, judgment for defendant with «£3 15s costs. Mr Chapman appeared for plaintiff and Mr Andrew for defendant. Harriet Dear v. D. Fraser, claim £2, judgment for plaintiff for that amount with £1 7s costs. Mr Haselden appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Wilford for defendant.