RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. MONDAY, 2nd JUNE, 1862.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 171, 3 June 1862, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. MONDAY, 2nd JUNE, 1862.

(Before Alfred Chethain Strode, Esq., R.M.) Drunkenness.—William Cohstantine charged with < this oft'ence, was in the iirst instance fined 205., or in default, committed for forty-fight hours imprisonment; but npon ,an officer of the Court representing that the accused had been in gaol since Saturday, his Worship permitted him to go at large. John' Matthews, charged with drunkenness ;>nd making use of abusive language, was fined 205., and fur the second offence'7s. Harriet Windor was ngiin brought up to answer a charge ot drunkenness, and Mr. Wcidon asked for a remand for seve > days. His Worship stated that the Provincial Government were quite prepared to defray the expenses of her passage to Tasmania, but no vessel was yet laid on the berth for Hqbart Town. The accused was remanded until the departure of a ship for Hobait Town. No Case.—Mr. Inspector Weldon informed the Court that that a party of the name of William linneis had been informed against for having trespassed upon the private premises of Messrs. Gibson and Macleod, but, since the information was laid, it had been ascertained that the defendant was a very respectable man, and that he had not been upon the premises for any improper purpose. Stealing.—William Anderson was charged by George Anderson with stealing a coat from the Prince of Wales Hotel, hi the first instance, the summons was not correctly filled in, and Mr. Calcult, Clerk to tile Bench, was necessitated to send it back for orroetioii. Upon the document being amended, and the case re opened, evidence was taken of a criminatory character, and the accused sentenced fo one month's imprisonment, with hard labor. llejianb Casv. —William Bryan was brought up on remand, and now further informed against for having uttered two valueless cheques. Mr. South appeared for the defendant, and produced a statutory declaration from Gerinaine Nicholson, Esq., in behalf of his client. Mr. Commissioner Branigan was in court to watch the proceedings on the part of the Crown. The Bench further remanded the case for another week, accepting; the same bail. !' Nuisances. The Inspector of Nuisances reported the following cases ; Florence Ilalliday, abated; John Child, abated; Maxwell and another, abated; in each of which instances, the cases were dismissed. An information of a similar character against one George Davis, was adjourned until to-morrow (this day). Stray Horses. —James Bradley, charged by Thomas Kyan with permitting his horse to stray,' was fined Is. and costs. Ejectment Cask.—ln the matter of John Dodd against George Louis Floury, the Bench, (comprising Messrs. Strode, Gillies, and Chapman.) gave judgmeut ; defendant I o be fined £2, together with £3 damages; with the understanding, that if he surrenders up possession without delay, a portion of the damages will be remitted. Under the present ruling, the damages to go to the plaintiff, but the fine to revert to the Crown. Dodds v. Johnston & Co.— In this case, there was no appearance of the defendant. The action was brought into Court for the recovery of £19 13s , on account of work and labor done. The defendant Johnston entered the Court shortly after the plaintiff had stated the particulars of his case. The Bench gave judgment in favor of the plaintiff, in the sum of £19 12s. In another case oi Frank Gallagher against the same defendants, for ten days' work, and loss of time, the Court pronounced judgment ia the favor of plaintiff, by consent, for £18. Pelling v. Injian.—No appearance of either party. The particulars of demand were for the supply of sundry pieces of room paper, valued at £0 2s. txl. The c?.se was dismissed. ''•■'■ ., Gibdwood v. Smith, HuTcniNS and Co.—Claim £15. Judgmeut for amount and costs ts. Johnstone v. Fi'aakck. —Settled out of Court. Feunandek v. Daniels and Co. -Action to recover the sum of £4, claimed on the delivery of two firkins of butter. Defendant Daniels appeared in the court, aud pleaded a set off amounting to £o 4s. The Bench gave judgment in favor of plainUlij ordering defendant to deliver up the butter, and telling him that he had his remsdy against the plaintiff in the ordinary course. BroomeS t. Wight & Co.—This was a claim brought into court for the recovery of two weeks and one day's work and labor done, at L 3 per week, amounting to L 0 &s Cd, of which the sum of 14 had been received on account, leaving a balance due of L 2 8j O'd. Case dismissed, as the plaintiff had been discharged for misconduct, and, under such circumstances, had forfeited nil claims to recovery. Sibald v. Sibam). —Mr. Prendergast appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. South for the defendant, who pleaded a set-off. Mr. Prendergast remarked that notice of the set-off ought to have^licen sent in. James Dunlop Sibald sworn, deposed that he knew the defendant, and had been in his employment from the 12th September, 1859, to Bth June, 1860. James Ferguson, the keeper of a restaurant, proved having been in the employ of defendant at Staftbrd-house, which was forinarly the name of the Provincial Hotel. The most singuhu1 feature in this case was connected with a disputed relationship existing between the parties: the defendant stating that r ths plaintiff was sent out to his ca.-e by his mother in England upon the death of his father, but he most emphatically denied the existence of any consanguinity. A witness, named M'Clisky, proved that the plaintiff had once waited upon him with instructions for a pair of boots from Mr. Sibald ; that the same was supplied; and witness held defendant responsible for them. His Worship reserved judgment, stating that he would give his opinion next Wednesday morning. ; The business of the Court terminated lit two o'clock.