RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 541, 12 April 1862, Page 6

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

■-■' '•■ "' •'• ■ ""Friday, 4th Aimi;iS62.' •' "' ' ' ' ' '(Before Alfred 'Chetham Strode,' Esq., R.M.) 'Drunkenness. — The undermentioned .parties wen ' fined 20s.' respectively j or,' in default committed fo: 48 hours.— John 1 Bitn'e'e (who h-ui been liberated, froto ■ g^bl 6n"the pre'vi6il3 J day after e'xpiatfng a sentence, oi 1 three' mtmrh"*)"'Mitfrhel Nesbett ;" Archibald 'Nesbelt; •" David- ' Jacfeson ; -Thdina* Griffin '; 'and • Stephen Nii oholr-; a^iiinsts this- last named man,-* charge was en.tered 00-Aiifi- sheet, for .having 3io..]avtful or visible i me^ns of -support ; but as the witnesses, were not pro sent, his discharged him, ,wbh £Vi caution' to ,in fulurej a good and inoval life. • ' ' ' Abusive Laxguaue.— Miteliell't7es>l«tt -was charged by' police sergeant ' Cleary -\\ kh having used indeceni ' and abusive' language 'ih a public ' place yesterday. '•The-'Tnan said 1 he "knew nothing Whatever about haying- done so. He as -fined 10s., or'in delaiut > committed for 24 hours cumulative on the former seu- .. tence.i >•■ > •; •-.>.-. NuiswoES.-r-rMr. James Nimon , reported that al the ca&es against the defendants formerly cited as•residirig'vn the Amende were now abated, and they ver* therefore dismiss 1. Mr.-Currie ' was ' ordered fo re move a quantity of'tnortar which he'iiad deposited in ■ front o£. the iknk of New South' Wales. Edward • Caspar-waa.Miinmoned for placing a quantity ofstonr ..audsand on the- footpath, jn liigu-i>treet. .This case was adjourned until "to-morrow, morning for evidence of Mr. Reid, cleik to the Town Board, whowussai'i by the defendant to have given him permission to d< bo. A ease against one George Gillies was feniunded] to Tuesday next,. Alleged Obstruction. — Thomas Norton was enlbd to appear to a summons charging him with havii.jz erected an office at the corner oi Man^e and Princestreets, which building abutttl o:i to the puhlc thoroughfare. Mr. South stated tha$ 4 thc defm la.it was out of town, an-1 would uot return until Mmday, but the case mi»hl proceed if the Bench would consent to leceivo Air. Norton's evidence after liis ioturu. Mr. .Nimon charged him with hu\ in sr erected an office at the corner of Mau ; e and Pnnce^-stivt, having 1 a notice up, intimating that it was a Shipping Olfhe. Whfn cross-exainiii'd by Jlr. Soutii, tin prosecutor said th.U the worus "Contractor's Office" were not upon the building-; but the same premiss were, at one time, in the occupation of a person who carried on business . as a contractor. Mr. ttouth now said that were the case remanded, he should be in a position to prove that the defendant had not trected the oiiice, and neither was he the tenant of the place. The case was accordingly adjourned unri! Monday. Lea v. Pattcx.— Jiulgmpiit for plaintiff in £-2 4e, together witli co^ts. M'Culluji v. Nathax. — Xo appearanceoteiriit'ipatty. Case dismused. D\'. Cahle & Co. v. Maukay. — No appearanc n of either pai'ty. Case dismi^i d. Rourke v. Haggitt.— Judgaientfor plaintiff in £4 ss, together witii cooh. Gordon v, Wilmamsox. — Judgment for plaintiff in £11 Os 9i\ t together with costs. ROBBINS v. Bevis. — Xo appearance of either party Case dismissed. Kay v. Camtbell. — No appearance of either party. Case dismissed. Shay.' v. Wilsox. — No appearance of either party. Case dismissed. Cuntio v. Wyse. — No appearance of either party. Case dismissed. Warrhl v. Tuckey. — Mr. South appeared for the plaintiff, and applied for a remand until Tuesday next, in consequence of the absence of a material witness, 'ihe case was adjourned accordingly. Eapferty y. Cliff. — Judgment for plaintiff in £6 1&. Hooper y. Atkins. — Mr. Prenderga&t for the defendant. The particulars of this case are as follow : — Ou the 27th December la^t William Hooper, tlie plaintiff, leased to Richard Atkins, the defendant, a piece of ground 25 feet deep for a term of twelve months, at £12 per annum. Application had been made for rental on several occasions, and defendant had paid two sumb of oOs. each ; but thcie appeared to exist some disputt- with respect to a right of -way. Evidence having been taken, the Bench delivered judgment for the plaintiff in £3, together with costs. Cater v. Lyoxs & Co. — Mr. Prenderga.st for plaintili; Mr. South for defendant. The plaintiff, John Cater, a Portuguese, had been in the service of ihe defeudant, v/ho ktep^ a lestaurantiu the Arcade, and claimed £12 10s. od. as arrears of waj.es. The attention of the Court was occupied for a considerable time with this paltry case, which involved something concerning a blanket, alleged to have been appiopriated by the plaintili, and who had apparently beon summarily discharged. Thu Bench did not considci that the plnuitiff iiwl been li-rhtly dibuiifai-bd, nmlgtivc judgment in £12 10s. and costs. Dyon v. South. — Settled out of Court. , ■:J,-',Cu}!KiKaiiAJi v. 'Akhuust. — Mr. Routh for the J>lftiatiff,"?cKu Gnnningham, and Mr. Cook for tiw] defendant, Charles Akhurst. The particulars of the :— On Thursday, the 2dth March .' fet, beilig oiic'eTths days at' the races, iMa&tg-terT: horse to the defendant, for the day. it was in gocd condition at the time, and -worth from £-35 to £-iO. In the course of the next, afternoon the animal w.a»j returned in a deplorable state, ft.id Mr. Mourhonse, aj veterinary surgeon, had expressed an opinion tuat itj was not -worth £."i, it liad been so badly treated. A witness named Batrett, described as a groom, stated that n lien the Loi>e v.a>> brought in it could not eatj anything, although plenty of food Jnd been placed | before it, and that, on the following morning it \wts cramped. Another \. itiie-~& wlio v.-a.. ex::iuine.i, s-aiiX he "would not now give £'2 for the horse, a* it stood in the stable, but that, before being so ill-u^ed and injured. lie had offered to buy it from the plaintiff for the sum he gave for it, to wit, £ii 10s. or £35. For the defence it was argued the injury to the horse had arisen from want of proper c^re and attention ; it might have suffered from being stabled in a too heated state where there was a draudn from the windows ; and it -was further alleged tlm the animal having had an abundauce of food plactd before it, had overgoned itself. The defendant was sworn, aud examined by Mi. Cook, to the effecr, that in returning homeward from the races lie rode the horse at the pace of about 5 miles an hour : h took him about an hour and a half, or an hour and threequarters to come in irom the race course. Witness i>aw the horee on Friday morning, vihen it was trembling in an open stable, "and he, considering the animal was chilled, ordered it to bd removed to a wax in, and closer stall. He then instructed a man to boil somewater for the ostler to mix. a warm mash of oata for tht horse, and recommended that a veterinary surzeon should be called in. His Worship observed that it appeared to him there was no j rojf of the hore e having been ovirtridden, and it Avas quite possible thattJie disease under which the animal was laboring, might have been caused by a chill or improper feeding. The Bench bad no alternative but to dismiss the case ; adjudging Messrs. Dixon and Hepburn, two witnesses who had been examined, costs at the rate of 10s. each. Mr. South saying thai he should take tht defendant into a higher Couit. Gibbons & Wilsox v. Isaacs. — lv thL case the defendant did not put iv an appearance, and service of summons having been formally proved, judgment •went for the plaintiff by default, in £17 10^. Sd., together with costs. . The business of the Court terminated at half-past' ' 2 o'clock. I

Saturday, sth April, ISC2. (Before Alfred Chetham Strode, Esq., 11. M.) DRU.NKEN'XESS.

The undermentioned parties were summarih dealt with for this offence :— James Kane, Martin Cunningham, Michael M'Lahan, and Richard Young. The last-named person presented a disgraceful appearance, having an ugly contusion oil the cheek bone, below the left .eye, his clothes torn in various places, and his face besmeared with filth.

NUISANCE.

The remand case against Edward Casper was resumed for the evidence of the Clerk to tin Town Board. It will be in the remembrance oi our readers that Mr. James Kimon informed against the defendant in this matter, for that hi did unlawfully deposit a quantity of stone and sand in front of his premises on the footpath, adjacent to Dr. Burn's church. The ease was partially tried on the previous day, when the prosetor stated that the deposit in had obstructed the thorougfare. Mr. Casper stated in vindication that he had placed the stone and sand on the rise, off the road, for the purpose of forming a durable footway, and he- further added that Mr. Eeid, Clerk to the Town Board, had given him consent to do so. Mr. Charles Reid was nov> called and sworn on his oath. The witness wa.asked by Mr. Nimon : " Did you give Mr. Casper permission to place stone and sand opposite to hit building, adjacent to Dr. Burn's church?' Answer : " No." By the Bench : " Did he evei speak to you about it ?" Answer : " Yes, he did. about two days ago ; he knew, he said, that hit house was above the level, and he asked me when the footpath was to be cut away ; and I told him I could not say how soon, but not directly." Hi& Worship : " Well, that is a direct contradiction of Mr. Casper's evidence yesterday." I shall fine the defendant 10s and costs.

The business of the Court terminated in ten minutes.

■'.•> '■•- 'MONDinv7TH •■Al>IUL,''lBG2. " " ."'" (Before Alfred Chetham Strode, Esq., RMI) , Drunkenness. — The undermentioned partie- 2 ! were fined. 2os., or, iv, , default, committed for '18 iouvs :— Thomas Rooney, .Thomas Morrison, ann , Malcolm, Simpson. ', „ , ■ t > , II 11I 1 ..Trespassing.— Chavlrs Abbot};, was chargcd,.ou the, information,' of Charles Bedel,' of Dunedin,,cur- ."* p'enter, -wiUi 1 lowing boon 3bu'»d oft his enclosed pre- \ misss 'In 'Great Kimy-street'last night at art uiis-e'a'- N oii- ? Me hour.' ' Tin; prisoner said he 'had d living Satin 1 '.' lay received £5 Lw. from a -Mr.. Reynolds, and -thai li .lsivinn: been drinking during .the forenoon of the previoits day/ he lnul.st>iiyed lie knew not wlme.^ Tin * prosecutor stated, that between one and two o'clock L diis morning 1 he was .disturbed by the screaming oi J his poultry, and, tiflon going into his yard, discovered ' the fowl-house had' been 'broken into, and the pri'■soner' standing; 'heal- it. When "intenogated, as v. v what lie ' "Wills 'doing tlierc, lie said he had loss '-' ■some money : ami a pair of trousers :lud a porcmon- , naie were found lyiny on the ground 1111 11. 1 Prosecutdi r said ho hnd 'bjen ■frequently disturbed lately In v ilrunkon men wandering on to bis premises ; that he * kept iiie arms iv, his house, aijd should not hcsitati ' lq blow-out the brains of any man who attempted to ' rob his dwelling?. Hh Worship committed the pri- ' so.ier to gaol for onc^week's bard labour ; anil can- '] lionid liiiu not to appear befoie (he Court again. ' Puoi'anitv. — Tuomas Rooney was charaed b} ; Constable John Edward Jones with having used pro- ' fane language ou tin* sth April inst. He was fined ' 10s., or, in default, sentenced to 2-t hours' imprison- * men!, cumulative on his former sentence of 4b hoiusfoi 5 drunken.it?;.-. ' Di&rußMixGTiiK Pkace. — Mary Ann Allen, con- | emmiir whom a local paragraph appeared in yester- ' .lay s paper, was now placed at the bar. When liei ' name was called by t'le poiiee officer, .she cvelaimed . ' •*' Mary Aim's tin child's name, not mine, and you*: bettu 1 give orders beioie you lvuin to dig a hole ibi me to bury nit; in, ami my children, then there v.ii: he no more bother." The woman w.u> now ini<>rmc<j : against for ha\ins>' no lawful or \isible me.m-< of sup port, ami when thcchsirae was road, she excl.thiicd :— ' •' Icm support iny-eli'if lam a'hnvcd to do so. Let • Government piovide for. itself, ;iiid not trouble me." His Worship : '• What have you to hay for yourself?"' Prisoner: "I say that 1 will take the young one. if you will take charge of the two others; you take two, i 1 can pro\ide tor the other." The prosecutor staler, that lie was near tlip Pioi incial Hotel, on Saturonv evening, about half-past eight o'clock, where the . prisoner was creating, a great" disturbance, and using tanguise both profane and obscene. She had upph committed on several occasions. Prisoner (veiiPinently) : •■' O, lie knows i>ll that, he sees it m 111.; books without < ;,ou mentioning: anything about it." His Worship : " Yes, Ido know to my sorrow. I grave jou every < chance on a former occasion, and you wove not uiit of _>aol four-and-twenty hours before you assaulted a constable.'* Prisoner (passionately: "They're not constables, they're brutes, the great majority of th™." His Worship : " Tin best provision lor you is to semi you to g'.ioi ibr tin tO mouth', with bard labor. ' I'rio:;ci': " We 1 !, I don't do a stroke in it! no, 1 won't i- not a single stroke for such a set of brutes like jou. There's a God above who will punish you all yet, you wivtehes. You're nothing more than a lump of mortality. Bow — wow — wow !" At this st.isfe. the prisoner was ordered to be removed lrom the Court in ' custody. I><Dr.CE>iCY.. — George Williams, for this offence, wa lined lUa. and costs. j Fokgkiiv. — Michael M 'Andrews, late of Waipori, was charged, on the mfoimation of Detective Tuckwell, with having, on the lOtli March last, felonious!} I forced and altered a certain order for the pauuent oi £4 Os. b"il. with intent to defraud the Piowm-ial Go - vernnient. The prisoner had only been arrested on : ."Saturday, and the prosecutor said he vas unable to ; on with the case until Thursday, to uhieli time it i was remanded, bib Worship saying he ■would accept a i valid and substantial bail. l Ejiui:zzlemust. — George Hawkins was charged, c t remand, with h:ivin^, while ;ictiiy in the eap.ioity of, I postmaster at Waitabuua, embezzle I ti.e sum--.of £^5 13s. 5d., received by him as postage dues. 1 Mr. P.tttun defended tlie accused. Archibald liarr, Postmaster at Diuicdiii, gave evir do. ice on oath to the etl'ejt that the prisoner had he^n 1 employed by him ; that, about the end of Decembei f laot, Mr. iJurke. llio Postmaster at Waitahuna, ix^irjne'l his situation, au<l the defeiulant was ;ipP puinte Ito the vac;niuy. Jli.s a])poiiitmcnt dated from tf the 25tli December last, aj Postmaster at Waitalnma. t His duty was to perform tlic general routine functions ! appet taming to tiiat position, tui-h as receiving lettei> ! and po.st,ige dues, &c. AH the country ponttunsteis L hiul genoral iiistructions to send down statements ol! B their accounts eveiy month, and in consociueui'e ot that not haviiijj bjun done by the prisoner, the prosecutor wrote to him on the 17th i'obruary last. The sums rcmlcied by the defemlnnt from liih salary weie c «s follows : — From the. 251 Ii to the Slst December, i£i Cs. 3d. ; ibr the month ot".I v anuarj', ii'lH'lo's. 'file J prisoner left the public service on the 27th March, i and the -amount was then only £16 12s. -lQd., all r'fffff^7J'flWJ l .'had .hfifiD.B?st.ip .his credit Besides the I almve, there Merc minor sums paid by the piKoiiei >' — ti wit, one amount of £3 7.5. G 1., and a, diatt on tlie tl ■(Dunk of A'ew Zsalaiul for £_'o". There v.:it v janother item of c.v>h fouiul in the ofiict '' •iat Wakiilvima, of £1 ss. Sd., and since his accc&iiuii tl to the vacancy thus cro.iusd by tlie dei'eudaut's de |r reliction. Mr. M'C.iwlay had reuiitted one (id. which I' ilia-l been discovered iv* the prisoner's bedding. A h Inuu'ber of .stamps, valued at i)u" 2s. sd. were found in ci • the office after hi.- dt-partnie, and a further sum oi 1 t'l (is. 4il. wa=. credited to the account of the piisonei 1 tor unpaid letier.s, which stun hud been iormeih v, ciiararevl against liiui. On the 27th January, leceipts i. pi'oducud showed an amount of £55 ; and on the lltii I March, a sum of £'iO, inakina; a total of J2SS to be ;tc- a oouuted for by the piisoner, and which, vhen com- p paivd with the sums absolutely lealised, left a balance p of £35 1-is. sd. On the 14th' ultimo, Mr. JSarr re n ceived a letter from the prisoner representing that ' the branch po.st oilice at Waitaiiuna Jj.ul been Imr- £ I glariously entered. ' 0 ■ Detective William Frederick Hitchins, sworn •jj - Stated that on Wednesday last, the 2nd April, lie re- '(. i ceived into liis posseseion a wan-ant lor tie arrest of n ■ the prisoner. He proceeded to Port Chalmers, found n ■ the prifoner at the Poit Chalmers hotel, plaj ing at b s bilhai-i^ ; called him outside the house ynd then told h ■ uinslhat lie bad a warrant for hisarrest on a charge of n 1 embezzlement, committed at Waitahuna. Prisonei n I told witness it was all his (prisoner's) own fault, t. : That he (prisoner) had been vei-y foolish ; that he had c = neen gambling, and had lost money. He die! > not say where. The prisoner afterwaids le- i :': ' marked, while on the way to the police station, 0 ? that the Waitaiiuna post-office had been broken iuto ; f, i that the staple had been wrenched from off the door . h , and the premises had been robbed. He likewise ob- v ■ served that he went to play the night following the |; i alleged robbery, to try t'j win sufficient to m.ike up t ) (he amount abstracted, but that he lest, and could .}. } ■ not do so ; witness then asked him what he played at, [, and the prirouer replied "billiards!"' He was heard , to say, after being taken into custody, that the trans- t : action was only a debt, not a case of embezzlement. '„ : and that, therefore, the authorities could do nothing f, I with him. c if . Upon the application of Mr. Inspector Weldon, °. the case was tin- day remanded until this day week, l the 14th current, for the evidence of a party named' Dick, upon who^e recommendation the prisoner had c been appointed, and for the testimony of Mr. Ma-! caulay, the prisoner's successor in office. r J Nuit-AXCK— The case instituted by Mr. Jame«|' Xiniou iig.iinst Mr. Thoma.s Norton, foV erecting a c juildin" which abutted on to the public thorough- - tare at the intersection of Manse and Princes-streets, ivus adjourned until Tuesday. c The Court then rose at oiie o'clock. V Tcusdat, Bth Apkil, 18G2. (Before Alfred Chetham Strode, Esq., R.M.) J Drukkekkkss.— The undermentioned parties were \, sunimaiily dealt with as specified : — William Fen wick, \, 205., or 4b hours ; Francis liobiusou (out on bail), the t same; Benjamin Farrell was, for this charge, fined,, Ms., or, in default, coDimitted for 4S hours. ThU L men had been up twice before for the like offence, in consequence of which he was now sentenced to im- jr I pris-unment and hard labor for the teim of seven days. f ( William na.r.dav- was fined 205., or the alternative of iei c ; 48 hours' incarceration in the gaol. ( KOnOEUY. 0 . Michael M 'Andrews was charged on remand from ti . the pievious day with having, on the 3rd March last fc _ forged an order for £4 ss. 6d , with intent to defraud a the Provincial Government of Orago. £ The accused pleaded not guilty. n Mr. Patteu appeared to watch the case for tlie pri- h ' souer. „ I Andrew Harvey, foreman of the Public Works at v i Waihola, having been sworn, stated that he paid the s ; prisoner an order on the 3rd March f>r £4 ss. od., which v !• Jocument w;is first of all to be presented at the lload t r Office in Dunedin, and cashed at the Union Uauk. h t The prisoner was a laborer, working on the roads at t Waiholii. Witness was afterwards given to underp stand that the order had been refused payment, and he I therefore desired to ace it, when it was shown to bim t •by a man named Green. Witness then saw that the o ■ figures in the order had been altered to £4 15s. 6d r ' rf itne n S !mme(lsafcely! mme(lsafcel y informed tke authorities of the t ) Road Office of the circumstances, and requested them I & not to pay it. He reported the aftair to Mr Piteairn, the i i Inspector, .who recovered the cheque. The nature of 1 £ the docuument given by witness to the prisoner was an c order for thi payment of labor on the public works, I , and was payable at the ltoad Office, in Dunediu. It wa3 either a cheque or an order. v Mr. Patteu ; Was it a cheque on a bank ]

Witness: Icdn'i&ay thab'it wai. ",' " Mr. PfJt'teimo'\va ( r'friie I '(t'tliatthe'ca's6 could "not proceed, as the witness did not kuow the" character of the locument he gave. i . i " ■ • In reply to Mr. Inspector JATeldon, witness said tjiat |iq would know the document if. he ja\\v it again. t , , ( James Bcnuett, laborer on yhe road-sat VVVthola, •>worti, 'stated: Th'iit he i: kn'ew''''tKe" 'adcudeil,' Vnd saw the order. 1 which. 1 • WAS 1 ' • lot ; £4' ss, xl. Witness cashed: the;, ordec .■ 'u\h-.' Patten liere submitted that the. ca.se> against the client mo^t tall ia tlie ground,, iuajsiiiuchj as,thu order was not •i'U Jourc, and there was such discrepancy lii.tlieeviiience i-lin W6rship lemai'ked' that 'the ordei' ought, certainly to have bde'n produceU. Mr. 'Weldon asked tor the ja£>e to stand over, for half au hour orao. ltemanded icc-ji\Ungly for,a.siiM't time, _, „ Weldc\n v. This case was instituted in u ]ie name of Mr. Thomas King Weldon, for illegally depositing timber on Crowir'lands. 1 ' A'person named Henry Sihirhuppeared : and- prosecutor observed that he Wxiaiiotitlie right party : it was an A. B. Smiih who should defend the summons. Mr. Nimon .said oliafc the case was for erecting a pile of timber near to the Government offices ; defendant had been | served with a notice to lemove it, and had not done! -.j. In the first >ti«ge. the present case was dismissed, ! and another suaimona was ordered to issue. Mr. A. 1 } i 3. rimith having put ia an appearance, Mr. Weldon simulated the .simu to the Eciidi, and the defeiklaut bcinj called upon to make hi", statement, denied that he occupied Crown Lands. If he did so, others weie equally culpable ; for many did the like iv the same localities. His timber was not piled on the beach, but in a building which hnd been, in the liist inbtinee, erected by the Customs authorities, and he had not received any notice fiom the harbor master to lemove the wuoil." Mr. Weldon : No ; you leoeivcd the untile from me. His Woiship : The charge befbif* me, J'.lr. We!('on, is electing a building on Ui'own Lamb. Mr. Weldon. lwithdiav the inforiniUion, your Y\"orship, and -w ill take out another summons. Nuisvxcf. — The aise of Mr. James Nimon against one (ieorge (jillie-i was dismissed, tlie nuisance havmsj abated. NIMON V. NORTON, This was a remand case, to which public attention was called by us in a local paragraph which appealed iv yesterday's Times. The particulars are these — Mr. James Nimon charged Mr. Thomas Norton with PiTt'tHisr a building- at, the intersection of Man«e .md Prineo-5-s.treet, the tenement abutting on to the public tliormiablarc. Mr. South, for the defendant, now argued tbat the ea^e must fall to the ground, as the information elui»ed his client with liaiing erected an o.'hce, wliciMsth.it phr.ise was a direct absurdity ; for the defendant did not erect the edifice which, before his f occupancy, had been tenanted by a surveyor. :! A person named Rsamuel riimmonds was called, but f did not respond. " Mr. James Nimon said he hail served the subpoena. I onjthis party, but it v> as for yesterday, although he - had beeu apprised that the case was adjourned until : to-day. Mr" Thomas Norton said lie had not erected thpofii fice himself ; it was put up by a surveyor, and, he - personally, was only the present tenant. - The Bench fined the defendant in a mitigated penalty [i of 10s and costs. M'AXDItEVS' CASE RESUMED. i The information against Michael M 'Andrews was re-npencd. , Mr. Androy Harvey, who had been pieviously - examined, being recalled. He now produced a docif- \ uient which he Wore to as bein"- the identical order 'i U'iven by him to the defendant for the sum of L 4 o.s iOd It was now altered to L 4 153 Gd. Mr. Pitcairn, n Inspector of Reads, drew up the document in ques0 tion. t Robert Henry Piteairn, sworn, stated that lie was a Inspector of Roads, and identified the cheque. Patrick Marline deposed on oath that he was a la- .' borer, working on the roads at Waihola ; ;md said ■' that about the"bcßinni'igof March last the prisoner pre- > senU'd him an order for the payment of money, and -„ he dished it for him to the amount of Li os u'd. The case ngiiiint the defendant, M'Andrews, was here - dismissed. n Lamp Out.— M. A- Lee, of the Unitnl States ■i Hotel, appeared as defendant to an information 1 eliar'Uii"- him with pm-mittimv Ins lamp to go out on ,'. the ni-ht of the 3rd April instant. Mr. Prenderjrast ii appeared for the defendant, and argued that by a wise t provision of common law, a man could not be legally j prevented from doinir that which Nature would not C allow him to do. His client was irresponsible in this h instance. The lamp had been trimmed, but hid bc,l come accidentally extinguished ; defendant hud paid i(in good price for it, but could not help an accident; i. indeed no one could. His Worship dismissed tho ease, i and ordered the defendant to pay costs, amounting c to 7s (i 1. lluMovimi Sto.nk. — Mr. D.ivid Dickie, harbor- ; 'imtirii 1 ; jv&itmr sgsi&ti gxs Mw&y Tuckvr for , having illegally removed stone fiom the south-west I side of Pelichet Bay, eontiary to article :j7 of the = Harbor Hegulatioas. Defendant said that he had utidoi stood from tho liail'or-uu^tor .it' L^>it" Cfialiucrs tli.tt he could tike any .stone he pleased below hi^h vatct maik. It had I ten .i mUtakc on his p,u-(, ; but he had only recently r.nived. Llib Woiship tiusted that a similar offence would not occur again: the maximum fine was £10. but, as the present offence had been committed )<y ilofendant through ißiioranue, he would fine him in a mitigated penalty of os. nini costs. Civn. U.vusf.s. William Paitin v. Andrew CaMing. - This ca.se v.as instituted for ii\e nvineryof damages fixed ,;i £-0, alleged to have been sustained by plainlift through dis::iib&al fiom son ice. contrary to an agreement for twelvemonths, fruuu Novcmlier, lSb'l, at £70 per annum. Mr. Ilowarth, provincial solicitor, sq)peniod for the defenes. After hearing several witnesses, the case was dismissed with costs. Dr. Joseph Worrel summoned Captain Tuckty for £20, being charges for metliu.il attendance for a Ikm .or man on board the Jeiiuv Lind. Mr. South for th'fjijlaintiff. Judgment for the plaintiff, £20 and costs: 'Di-fuiidant saM he could not ji.iy tlic money, he h;ul not a farthing ; he had lost £55, personal wages by the loss of the vebsel. aud lie knew of no alteiuiath c but to give Captain Tuokey an order on his agents heie. The plaintiff w;is tiiideratooil to bay that he would like to haie a substantial guarantee of payment. A conversation occui i inir b .'tween tlie parties, the Bench ordered them to retire with tlie view of endeavoring to come to some arrangement. Alexander Hastie &ummoucd James Forrester for the recovery of 125., o'iaige. of cairiage of three loads of oats from the h'each to the Provincial stables, at four shillings per load. Defendant pleaded that he had not employed the carrier. Plaintiff that on the 17tn January last, tlie master of tlie Picaul ordered him to convey some bags of oats to the defendant's stables : and, when he demanded payment for so doing, about a month orrA\ weeks afterwards, the claim was lepudiated. He pioceedert l isainst the defendant, because the rule was to sue, in| all similar cases, the peivm at whose premi:;es the | goods carted were delivered. His Worship directed Che plaintiff to proceed against the party who ha'i engaged him ; ami dismissed the present citae with cust^, amounting to Sa. , Eupheinia Wilson summoned Augustus Avavne, a country settler, for payment of £0 f>s., balance of jwages alleged to be due h} thu defendant to herself, > Jfor domestic service at the rate of £to per annum. I Judgment weut for the plaintiff, in the full amouut claimed. In the following instances, neither plaintiff nor defendaut put iv any appearance, and the respective cases were accordingly dismissed ; namely, Hines v. Cluttei buck : Alexander Maekay , of Hast Taieri v. Jolm Barnes ; James Jones and Alexander Williamson v. James Jliddell. The undermeutioned cases were dismissed after j hearing : Jones and Williamson v Sullivan ; Solomon v. McLeod and Giiison ; and Joseph Wilson v. Frederick Tuokey. \\\ the cevse of Charles Solm.in against Thonijus Dickson, for recovery of payment of £•20, less £6 125.. paid into Court, his Worship gave judgment ior plaintiff in the sum of £11 65., with' cost. j Remittances.— ller.ry Ford summoned J. A. Douglas, niana',;er of the Bauk of A"c« South Wales, for tiie sum of £20, under circumstances detailed below. Mr. Patteu for the plaintif; Mr. Howarth, (Provincial Solicitor) for the defence. The plaintiff^ couusel stilted the particulars of the ease to be simply these : that a persyn named Ford, who spelt his name Ford, went to the Dunediu Posc-oiiice n shoittime ago, and received r. letter, in which was enclosed a Bank draft, from Kate Forde, in Melbourne. This man went to the Branch Bank of New South Wales here, and got it cashed. He (tho plaintiff) was in a position to produce* certain letters from the person \vho sent this draft ; aud he could prove that the person who received the money vas not the individual who was entitled to it. The learned gentleman contended it to be an admitted fact in law that, when a bill.is payable at sight, the presentee should be iclen-j titled. Henry Forde, swqru, stated that he was a storekeeper, and spelt his name with "a finale;" and] that some time ago lie received a letter of advice ; i or, a letter intimating that his sister was horrified at not having heard from him since the money had been] remitted. (The letter from witness's sister was! handed up to the Bench). His Worship looking at! it, said the contents intimated that a person named Kate Forde got a draft on the Duuedin Branch Bank of N-ew South Wales; and remitted to one Henry Forde. The Provincial solicitor argued that this letter conveyed no evidence of the fact. His Worship did not think there was any case.

flierc had been no evidence toMicw that'jG^O wa'sduc by tlie tlefeiid'tlUt 1 tb p" lalnlilf. ' ''.'''"' " , , 'Mi. 'Patten "eOiiiuitfiite-'i" on the circuni^tancfi'of a perdOtiiaameJ-'i'oi\l going to 1 the I3a4ilc nnili getting posiiies.sion of a sum to which he waSinot entitled. Us thought that the plan adopted, in Victoriji, .J.nd else"where, illicit, v/ith comuieiciiit tulv.iutlige, be adopte^ anu'r'euOgniscd iiriihis Colony.' naulcly", tiiatllie^resentee'ot 1 aidrAft'sliouM lie reifuired to gwe proof of per'b.oual identity' \vith.>*the.nume'on-the'biU.i tAl'i* Wot.sbin.vuled tiutjb there \yits ijo. ov.uloiicq before him nf. the amount v beijjg-due hv.tUe ,^iUi,k : he appreliLncled there w.ii no case ' ( :' awl ' disniisoed the information, '-with' 'coasts, ({mounting to \)'^.j " HuiiLKR v. P6wßn.^-Mr. Pattert for the plaintiiT ; Mr. Piendorcasc for. the. defendant. It appeared that his case was brought into Court on a summons : the words therein being, a '"promise' 1 to buy a cornopean for £o : — which phi-ate was totally diffeicnt to one of having actually purchased. The: plaintiff was non-suited accordingly. Adaji and Akothuk v. Is.vAcs.This was an action iustituted by John Adam and Jainea Tyrrel against one S. li>a,-ics, on adi&lionoied cheque fur the leeuvery lof £lilis. Mr. South, for the defence, expl.-iiue.l j that his client admitted the debt, but h.ul i;i\en r jcheimf on account of a firm which hn.fl failed . ii '"act, it appeared to have been drawn ou an iusohenl icstate. liis Wm.-ship pronounced judgment iv favoi of the pl.iiui.iH', for £G 14s, payable at the rate of 3(J: |wtckly from thU dale. i SiiK.r.ii.v.v v. Ku.-sei.li. — Timothy Shechan, plain 'tiff; Clnrlc> Ku-.sell. defendant. Jmlgment foi I pl.untitl in the sum of £'1 Bb. I Muukord v. Nohton. — Mr. South for the defence Action to lecover i'"2(), alleged balance of silan li-l.iiiiicd by the pl.tiutitV, \Y. H. Mumfoi^l, wlio exhi | bi'ed much unseemly excitalnliu of temper on the |ncca.-iou ; and was reprimanded by the Bench. Air 'South wud, the parties appeared to be connected, am Me would have been mucli butler if they could havi •'adji'sted their mutual dilleienccs out ot t'uiirt. Judcr Imeut for plaintifF iv the muu of £11 oh. Sd. tugethe .[with costs, lfis. ;i After a row other unimportant cases, of no interea Jto the general reader, the Couife rose at tlirei o'clock. Wednesday, 'Jtii April." (Before A. C. Stkodk, K.sq., R.M.) Drunkt-nwcss. — Tlic iimlcrtncntioned partic weie summarily dealt with for this offence — M.i'.eoln Lei 1 , John R'its, James Cjri'ele, Henry M'Kinhiy Janus M'T.im'ili, John Cninpbell, and Thos. Taylor 'who were severally lined COaCach, or in default, cum jimtted for 48 hours. | Annie Dunbar, quite ayouurrwonian, was cbarari ,1 with ilniiikeiiue^s. t"cr»fiint Chapman reported tha she Ind been convicted ot drunkenness ou the 27tl February and 12th March. His Woiship ob*ervei that there apponred to lie no hope for her ; Jie wa . quite Mirpii-'ed to see one so young in such a position : M'le appeared to be quite incorrigible. The Bimicl .would tine her for thus oiJl-nce, -20s, or in default sen I fence her to the ordinary alternative of -id hour? iv • Ifaol, to be supplemented *bv a cumulative sentence o .|Se\en days' imprUonment with hard labor. j Assault — Thomas Taylor, who bad been previously h'neil for intoxication, was now charged oi „-tlie information of Constable John Edward Jove [with having assaulted him in the execution of hi ; duty. He was fined 40s and costs, or in default, com mitted for 14 clays' imprisonment, with hard labor. I x decency. — John Millar was informed ayains .jfor otfeuding- agviinst decency, and was fined Is. am ■ costs. ij Robbery— Robert O'Brien was charged, on th , ! information of one .1 oseph Carncross, waiter at th Royal Hotel, with liavinp, on the Bth inst, stolen coat valued at 20s. The man pleaded not puiltj ; Prosecutor said that from certain infornation he re ceived, he searched for his coat, which had been su- . ponded on a nail, and, niis-intr it.fi'om i^s place, trace lithe prisoner across the road to the United titatc .[Hotel, where he discovered the man with his eoa j hanging- on his arm. The Clerk to tlie Bench identi nfU'd the prisoner as having 1 been formerly convictc i for stealing ft swag at Mic Commercial Hotel. Sf>r geant Chapman remarked that tlie man had on! i been released from gaol on -the previous day. H I 1 was sentenced to three mouths' imprisonment, wit ! j hard labor. : Unlawfully Receivixo. — Samuel H>yce wa: ■ i'harc;ed, on the information of Jo-ej)h Carncross, wit! havinir, on the Bth April iiibtant. viii.iw fully iei-eivei ; one silk handkerchief, valued at "s. o'd., wiiicli ha. i bijen btoleu by John O'Urien, the prisoner bafon niiMitioncd, -itiul well knowing tlie same to have bed ttuleii. A person uauiud Nichohis Temperley depose* , to having, seen the handkerchief in possession of th prisoner at the Royal Hotel. The man . said that h ; knew uotm'ng about, the handkerchief; he had beei accosted by O'Biieu, who told him that he came Iron the same place in Scotland as lie (prisoner) did J ■ ffiijii iii ths body af JJbs.LWJ yvhißU-rnx} a sLOaues. to ifie effect tiiafc the prisoner h:td come over in tlu AKliuiKi with him; he had been acquaiutec with the defendant for .some coiibiilcnibh u'nibi a""il*iliril l ilVv7i' - i'innnriiiiirilr inivrtmv .niyAliijys Sergeant Cliajnnan iufornird the J'eneh that the accused, Samuel Unjon, had been otisorvcd in the company of Robert O'ijrien, who had been previously convicted. His Worship cautioned the man as to the company ho kept, and said there was not the slightest doubt on his mind but that the prisoner had taken the handkerchief, well know imr it to have been stolen. Committed to fouiteen days' imprisonment with lianl labor. I'OROERY. — Christopher Bennett was charged, on the information of Robert Henry Piteairn, with luvinp, on the 3rd March last, at Waihola, forced an order for the payment of money, to wit, 4/. ss. Gd., with intent to defraud the Provincial Government or OMpo. Tun prisoner s.aid his name was James, not Christopher, Bennett, and the alteration ou the face of the information was made accordingly. The first witness called by Detective Joseph Tuekuell, who had charge oi the case, wi- Michael M'Amirews, who hail been tried ou the previous da\ and acquitted. (S"e Ttinesof yeatwd..y.) He state' 1 on oath that nn order for £4 s*. 6d. had been given to him by Mr. Henry, the over-eer of roads, in payment for work done; he gave it to a person named Patrick Mackay, for the purpose of fretting it cashed. Pat nek Maekay sworn, deposed that be knew the last witness (Michael M 'Andrews), and recollected having; received a road order about the 2nd or 3rd Maich from him. Witness in his turn j nave the order to a person named James Bennett, a [laborer on the roads, to cash for him ; he did so, and l'irave him 4.1. ss. Gil. ; the document now produced was the same, with the exception of r.ot having: th fifrure 1 before the 5. i-Jany Smith, a baker at Waihola, knew the accused. Witness had bepn in the habit of ciiiliiug; road orders. He recollected the prisoner bringing him an order early in March last The order pioiiiced wj's the one which the prisoner presented ; it was 41. 15-;. (5<J., anf witness gave him 4/. Los for it, and the n.-xt d.iy deliver, d the order to Mr. Green. Tin order having been identified by Mr. Piteairn, the accused was fully committed to stand ibis trial at the next Criminal Sessions. * Lahcexy. - Margaiec Aimes \wis charged on the inforniiition of Joh i lloss, a partner in the drapery e->tablibhment of Be_ r g, OUri&tie and Co., with having ou the Bth April iiibt., teloniou-jly stolen one shepherd check shawl, valued at £1 12s. b'd. sterling. M^r. Cook defended the prisoner, who pleaded not guilty. Jolm Ross sworn, deposed, that between five aud six o'clock on the pievious evening,- ihe prisoner entered the shop ana effected some purchases in damask and fringe, for which she paid, and then left the premises. Ln about a quarter of an hour after the accused left, one of Kirkpatrick and Company s salesmen called him out or the shop, an.l asked ■nit ness if they had any shepherd chejh shawls. Mr. I Cook objected to this conversation being admitted in 'cvi lonce against his client, who was not present when jit trnnsp:re>l. Witness, being corrected, proceeded to depose, that, in consequence of certain information he received from a person in Mr. Kirkpatrick's shop, he looked over borne shawls, an invoice of which had been recently opened. There ought to have been IS or 19 (he could not say the number exactly,) bul at all events, one was missing. None of the" shawls in question had ever been sold, or disposed of in any way. Crofcs-cxatnined by Mr. Cook: — To the best of witness's belief, the shawl now produced was the :inissim? one, but it bore no private or trade mark, by which lie couLl identify it. While the prisoner was in the shop making some purchases, she stood close to the counter, and near to the place where the shawU "w^re. " The invoice price of the shawl -w;is 22s He belie veil that the prisoner had once been in the employ of Williamson & Co. Witness did not remember whether theie wero any customers in the shop before prisoner.entered, or after she quitted the premises. He could not tell how- many shawls there were before the accused entered the shop. He had laid them out upon the counter ready to be marked off, but could not swear whether he had marked off the price or not. I When witness served the accused with damask and .friiige, he obseived nothing suspicious or strange in ' her manner. Witness did not see the prisoner take the shawl, but he saw her leave the shop. It wa>quite possible that there may be other shawls of a | similar pattern in Dunedin. The shawl produced jdid not appear to have been worn. Witness had frequently detected mistakes in invoices of goods; hu I had served the party now before the Court on several ! occasions, and always considered to be a very respectiable person. Mr. Inspector Weldon now called David i Milbuni, a salesman in the business firm of Kirkpatnclc& Co.; but the oath was dispensed with, and his Worship observed that if it was intended to have this person's evidence committed to writing, he must be sworn. Mr. Weldon said he merely wished to liave Ms statement of what he knew concerning the present trans-

faction':' arict'his Worship having consented to hesr.it,, [Mr. Milburn will, 'that' about six o'cl6ck the preceding, i j evening, tile 'accused entered the shop of.Mossp. ?l Kirkpatrick & Oo. ; anil eii'juireit after some black Mcktotie. Aftjer being served, she took a shawl from •under her mshtlej and asked fora sheet of paper tv> U wrap it in. _t£e procured the paper'aM. folded the - [shawl "up for 'her could not swear to th'o shawl f jii&iiu, but he could speak as to the. description o; i the article. He recognised iif as being of" a woulieu •[texture, and -not having any of that kind in their own he had more particularly remarkeo 2! the nature of the fabric, and coiumuuieatcd with I Bo»;j;, Christie, & Co. lie also observed, when haud;.ling the shawl, that it appeared never to have been 1 1 worn. -I Mr. Wcldon : If your Worship thinks that the y ■ identity of tiie .shawl has been established, I am pro-'-'1 pared to proceed with the ease, but i must admit o'that I do uot think it is. His Worship : There i 3 very considerable doubt a on my mind, ai.d, ot course, the party is entitled to t ' the benefit of that doubt. I do not think that the v, identity of the shawl has been established at all: and .! {addressing Margaret Dimes) " You are, therefore, a 'discharged. ' li The young woman then left the Court. ir Thursday, April 10. ls (Before Alfred Chcthara Strode, Esq., R.M.) 1. DISOKDLULr. rl John Lynch, just fined for intoxication, was 'now charged ois the information of Constable .'• Hobt. M.ilone, with having unlawfully assaulted y him in the execution of his duty, :ind also with '■ having used abusive language in a public place 10 in Dunedin. It appeared that the man had onh I j'heen released from iraol on the previous day, after . _ expiating a term of imprisonment for assaulting t. iliis wife in a jnost brutal manner. His Worshi|> that the man seemed to be quite ineorIgible, and committed him to imprisonment for a st'terin of one month, with hard labor. !e ASSVLLT. I James Farmer was charged on the information !of Jessie Macleotl, with having on the evening of the 9th April, unlawfully assaulted her. The defendant pleaded not guilty. Froseeutrix stated 5 on oath that she kept a fruit shop opposite to Dr. „* Nelson's premises in Rattmy-street, and thai v | about seven o'clock on the previous evening she c.was cleaning a mantle, when a knock camer.i i-I the door, and when she opened it the defendant i enquired for a person named Ike. She told him xi, that he was not there, upon which the defendant 't,forced his way inside, and seated himself down 11 [upon a box in her bedroom, demanding some "j drink. Prosecutrix told him that she did no> 15 keep drink fot sale in her shop. Up r >n this deII fendant laid hold of a bottle containing sherry ,_ exclaiming-, " What right have you to keep driiu nin your house ? lam a detective."' He then af struck prosecutrix n, blow over her left temple. saying, " I should very much like to see the man ■- who could put me out of this." n A witness, described as Mrs. Mathews, was 65 called to sustain the prosecution, and gave evi'"s deuce in support of the foregoing statement. 1- William Carr, for the defence side, deposed on ;t oath, that he accompanied the defendant on th< 1( j previous evening, and recollected going to the house occupied by Jessie Maclond. Defendant le asked him to go with him there. Defendant ie knocked at the door while he remained outside n Upon the door being opened, defendant enquires v - if a certain part}- were inside, and received au ? " answer in the negative. They, therefore, weni ~"j in and sat down. Defendant then asked if tht±\ had anything in the house to drink, and the proj,(. secutrix would not let them have anything. A i_ row ensued, in which a decanter was thrown ai id the defendant, -which struck him in the cheat, r- After the bottle was thrown, all continned quiet, ly Defendant raised his hand to save himself troni !«■' the decanter. Witness then went out. tn Defendant expressed a wish to call evidence as to the character of the prosecutrix. liis Worship said he did not require it. lie considered that a. most unprovoked and unjustifiUl able assault had been committed, and he should :e therefore fine the defendant in a penalty of £3. i) and costs, telling him that he had no business to ■d be in the houso at all. Ie Nuisances. — The nuisance alleged against one '« Stevenson was now, by Mr. James Nimon, rev ported to have been abated. In another case inotitutcd against Margaret Swords, the nuisance ', was said to be not abated ; her son now occupied g the pface, wMcli was jfn a most ffithy condition. c l The Bench ordered due" anJ'fo'fraal notice' to b't c served. Tlipjp- were a few summons cases for the . r_ca covery of disputed claims, but the particular.. ' - were utterly devoid of public interest. ' >' At hulf-patt eleven the Court rose. ' ' t **. , c RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, PORT) CHALMERS. I (Before T. A. Mansford, Esq., R.M.) Friday, Hh April. ' 1 On Friday week an information laid by Sergfani ' 1 Burns, of the Otngo Police, nirainst Mr Criclimorc, oi ' 1 the Royal Hotel, Port CuV.hnevs, was heard before '' > this Court, and adjourned until to-day for decision. , ( : instating liisjudgment iv the case, his Woisliipsaid !. 1 that the information was one for selling spirituous . c liquors without being duly licensed. The sale though ' not admitted by the learned counsel who appeared for j! * i he defendant, was scarcely disputed, and, even if it 1 had been, was clearly proved. The defence set up \ was t'-mt the house was licensed, but that in const- !; 1 quence of some difficulties that stood in the way, 1 owing principally to the absence of the original holder i 1 the license could not lie legally transferred. That n 1 license for the house existed* was evident, and the c 1 question arose whether the breach complained of wa«- r 1 one cont(.-mp!ated by the Act, and for which soseriou- ? > a penalty sis £50 is inflicted. He could not help '' c thinking that it was only intended such a fine as _ 1 this bhutiM lie enforced in cases where persons so f;-,r l infringed theiawastosellspiritswithout a lirensuhaving | been gr.-.nted for the house in which these spirits were J; ■* bold, and in confirmation of this, he read the I4th ana ' 1 loth clauses of this Act, which are as follows :— c * '" 14. Jiverj' such certificate shall be nidi aud void. [ L * uuless the same, and the sum of £30, or in case the ] c house to be licensed shall be within the limits of any v borough, then the sum of £-10 shall bt lodged in the ' r '" olKee of such treasurer, as aforesaid, on or before '. 1 the 3'Jth day of June next following the annual . 5 lioensinß meeting at which such certificate was. ' •granted.'" '"15. On receipt of tueh certificate, and r 1 payment of the said sum of £30, or in case the houst. * tj be licensed.sh;Ulbe within the limits of any borough. ' * tiien the^iiim of £-iO. such treasurer shall issue and .' ' shall register in Viis office a license in the form here- |, » inbefore piescribed."' From this, his Worship conti- fl " .uie«.L it seemed clear that the house ib licensed ami * not the person lSui)pot.iug any other breach had heei. \ 1 committed under the Act, iv a case similar to this. ' - vshei-e a license had been granted but not transferred, "' r the information would be laid againsjfc the origiiuii ' 1 iu)lder and not against the paity in^ possession, it it [ L the interest of the original holder to pet a [ le^d transfer as speedily as possible, for in the uveiu | 5 of any breach he and his sureties would be the pariiea fl liable. In addition to nil this, it was in evidence " 1 that the defendaut had done all in his power to obtaiw J 1 a transfer, but had not been able to snccee.l. Unibr ;, 1 all the I'ircdiusUnces— more particularly, consideiiu. , ' as he did, that a manifest injustice would be done b\ ; 1 inflicting a iine— he could come to no other conciu- * 1 &ion thau that the information must be dismissed. 1 ' Monday, 7tii April, 1862. ' { Drunk. — George Young and David Bruce, sea- j , men, were charged with hein<» drunk and disorderly . r on the clay previous, and each were fi.>ed 10s, with j j the altomative of *2i houi-s' imprisonment. J, \ Assvult. — David Bruce was also charged with j . assaulting Constable Drummond in the execution o! „ \ his duty, and destroying his uniform, valued at X'i*. ' and, having pleaded guilty, he was sentenced to li t ; ' month's imprisonment. James Coyne, charged with , , the snme ofFeuce", and attempting to rescue a pii- „ , soncr, was remanded until to-morrow. Licenses. — Applications fora publican's license \ ' were lodged by James Galbraith, John Crickmore, tt \ and John Hovnby. | Wednesday, 9th April, 18G2. • 1; Ihsubokdination.— William Rankin, seaman & I on board the barque William Watson, wa9 charnr:d, i [ on the iufonnndoii of Captaia Pendletoi., with dis- w , obeying lawful commands during the passage ol J. . the vessel from Melbourne, but, on evidence being , v L taken, the Bench considered there w.is not sufficient t] [ to substantiate the charge, aud dismissed it accord- J [ in tfy- «, . BREACH OP HARBOR REGOLATIONS. w I * William M'Gill, enptnin of the tug steamer Sam- b . son, was charged with coutravaning the regulations rj of the port, by removing the damson from her anchorage on Sunday, the Gtli inst." Captain M'Gill, c . . lor whom Air Preudergast, solicitor, appeared, pleaded ft ) Nol Guilty. I i Sergeant Joyce, of the Wnter Police, by whom th< ti . information hud been laid, said that, on the 6th inst.. ,{< ■ lie observed the Samson moving about the imrboi h * from a wharf to a Bhip in the Bay. He immediately tl

nent on U^nl, and a^ecJ Captain 3^'Gil ifhTZT .. , tamed pension for so doing from kv. .Thomson ,she harSvr master, and lip saidi.e had not. J * IIOUISOn i Uy Mr. l.vnder<nst: He w;is wi-pi-aiit, of water police., ami i» a ,i i^ engaged in runncc ion »th m H U W,.- S B ny* but not anvwhSe Si? Hie mbiw« was usually employed a* a Uiir steamer" « n t hi^xsttfon die vn» discharging slwcp fioTSS •.l.m bruisa friilcm. Tho BritSli trident had been U-o day* down at Uic and came im | nt " NitimSay audit but he did not observe any ,he°n disembarked until Sunday morning. H, ; saw nolffiS .particular about the «.«.» diJR-mit from the i Jl i-eijrhtsot other vessels. Was nut aware that theil wi-re an u-vusunl number dead and dying. BclK lhat Capiam Haddock, of the Trident,'' told him £ had l«t a great many within the l!lstl !lst two •V i , " ever see " the ll!U>bm> regulations erected on .1 board in a conspicnons position, but he had received a number of printed copies iron, the" urbor master, and left them on board vessels, thou"h ' lie was uot bound to do so. He cntl.l not Hay & i'T. ,"' O i Vr x)'VJ.fi °"> { '- V on bl)iuxl tllc Samhou or not. i ..ld Lapt. M-Gill that he ought to have had written perineum twin the harbor-master U ilium Thomson, harbor-master, had a copy of -lie Ordinance put into his hands for the mu-po-e of -weannc to it at being an oiuciaf copy of all the'har|)or re s -ul:iu.Mis, but he stated that the copy piesented to him dul not conutn all the reauLtfoni. k Mr. I iv«.leriatet held that, on this account the charge spunst his client must fall to the ground in general, cue Judges were supposed to know the law whicnit was their oiKee to declare; but whenever any question aro.^e a, to .some .special reflation, •Mich a.-, my::; be contained in a Kail way Act or a duetto. ,t, t y-as expected that a copy >hould b2b 2 pro-ilumla-u:no particular clause pointed out by the ooun-ei r uui-.ed i n tno oase _ Thp s;uuc ' j conten.UV.. w,,s applionble in the case of thc«e harbor u:,iimion*. 1 lie particular reim ations atrk'Uu" the point, in nuestion might or might not, lie thore,°and as the who.t? ot the regulations *eie not there, so far •is the know le^ipei.f the Court went, the Court until better iiistr.n-tcd, might fairly presume that these regulations had been amended, or displaced by others Uelore Misummg the harbor-ma.ster and the ser <cant ot police m this .stringent afciurtion of a« penal and what he uht> learned counsel) considered to be a most i.Jiuman and unchristian regulation, tho (,Wt ou«ht to be well assured that it couKt. be clearly shown to exist in law. and he considered, after the evidence of "-•M't- I homson, there was uot'butncient law to enable iiis \\ crslup to act. lli* Won hip said that, in face of the evidence given •ie nad oertamly no alternative but to dismiss the case. Wilfl-l Mi-rdeu.— John Morris Grey was charged m the information of Sergeant Burns, with the willful raunlcr ot John Cross, on Sunday, the tith instant. ■'n the cinrge being called, Senreant Burns applied .01; a remand until he should be" able to perfect^ the •vidence against the prisoner, and, with his own consent, he was, accordingly remanded until Friday tiie gold fields. (From the Daily Times Correspondent.) . ** must not be supposed that because the Escorts tor the last two weeks have been small, and that those succeeding are not likely to be larger unless- ' Tie' 11 . o ,"' £ louud is discovered, that therefore the xoklnehls ot Otago are about to collapse. What with me broken weather, which. I suppose, we must now count upon as likely to last for the next four months it Jeast, the miners have only been working half time, .md eonsfquently the amount of gold produced has ueen proportiontibly decreased. To this cause alone is to be attributed a large portion of the falling os, ainouuh it is also notorious that the population on oiie goldlields has sensiblydecreased, and consequently the tower turners the less gold produced^- It inattera not that men may be woikins tin profitably if they lemamon the field ab all, gold is produced which ieiu.s to sw ell the escort, and ciuises it to appear that uliere is a large amount of prosperity when in .•eahty many of them are working for perhaps a pound ji week. No more forcible example of tins sfcUe of things can be pointed to thaa the present portion of the flower of the Victorian goldtields — JJL'iuligo. There large numbers of men have been worlvin" tor years fora bare subsistence, yet the amount, ot jro!J sent down by escort weekly, was large, and accordingly it was "agreed, without referonce to tiie tnornious ioss of capital, in the shape of labor unpaid for, that old Benuigo still retained its pristine reputation as the first goldiield in the world. iiow, with the population, has departed this fictitious prosperity, may be gleaned from an extiact from the Bvndigu Advertiser, which lately appeared in your eoluuius. Hence the conclusion may be drawn, if men .ire compelled to remain on anygolilneld, the precious metar\wll be piodueed, with or without profit to the {iioducers, who continue to expend their capital in vie slmpo of labor, for the benefit of. those encra^ad in suppl.ving them withtHe siibstiinces necSssarr to ".".aiß isceuce. This, however, cannot be said of the B°,,msß r.el'is of Otogo ; those digging are undoubtwuraH doing well, and their labor is beinjLjSljlMH i-emuncrated". Tlinf Tfie~nlmclraTSo OTS^Pl* IB nave some faith in the future of these uold-ficl<l<. , be leanit from the anxiety disphned to^rehtrn tonZ the Mining Board, who will frame wise and md £„ uiwsforits development. If those who me JK iiere dirt not intend to remain, 0? believed 4 \'ictorian friends would have it, that there w-is°i M ' -ok! It-it in the country, they would scarcely take tl trouble to return men to make regulations <>f whipT they did not intend to take advantage. Already abonr ,1 dozen have been nominated, ami us their tendenei ' .ire supposed to lean to pu<idlm«- or sluicing feo .T t'lcir merits canvassed. The advocates furs!ui ( .j n , <: Delieve tliat this is the only way that anything «..„ bemadeoutotthegTOund, while the pudiller thinks lie can make, as a few are now doing, lti ov Lift -i-weck, a man is entitled to be allowed «ome say . ls tv> the bye-laws to be framed. Again, the genuine ' batter" (or man who works by himself and Ims no mates) expresses himself in lnngunge v-Ty forcible but sc.uvely polite, and always with the n-«i-,tauce of adjectives of a sangui.inry character— " That he knowd where he eau got a bit o' gold, and he uint a to be swaniped out "by any nujective puddle n-oni any adjective sluice or machine. Thus ar v n or i sons inclined this or that way in accordance with tho kind of mining tliey may be following. It is cuvioui 0 observe the re-appearance of the old prejudicea of ins. Victorian mineis, viz., that the storektepei-s nic their deadly enemies, always engaged iv some dangerous conspiracy to deprive them ot their earning ami libyrty. This was manifested to a considerable dxveiit ot the large meeting held at the G.ilden Age tiie otner evening, when Mr Moses, of the Victorian stores, proposed n Mr Vahn, there were immediate erics of " no storekeeper candidate," and when n show of hands was taken this gentleman was, J believe tVom tins cause alone, nlmbst unanimously rejected, it was in vain that Mr Moses expiuined tlint the interests of the miner and storekeeper were identical, rbat if they did not make mouey, men of his class would be ruined, and that therefore it wns abourd and ridiculous to suppose that the storekeepers were 111 any way opposed to the miners. The miners iiUeued quietly to his address »ut evidently went away unconvinced. It is somewhat strong?, tuat for ,1 laige gold tield like thi> tlure should only be one po.lmg place ior the members to be returned to the Milling Hoard, although the centres of population .ire divided by miles, surely some alteration cm be made in this respect, before the day of polling and p aces appointed both at Wetherstous and the top of Gabriels Gully, so as to command Monroe's. At pa-sun t the oaiy polling plnce is at the Junction, and as it is just possible from the interest tttkeu hi the Hieciion, some hundreds of mind's will register their votes, it is too bad that they should be snb]ected to the inconvenience of walking several miles, and then /iiiding" it impossible to get near the polling booth. I trust the Government will see the absolute necessity of proclaiming- the^e two places so that rlie votes of the miner rpsident may be taken on the spot. In reference to the rush towards the Molyneux, I may mention that Major Croker, accompanied by St. John Branigan, Ksq., J. P., proceeded to the supposed «te. but were unsuccessful iv tinding it. They found iletaciied parties of miners working tor uearly nine miles down the Tuapeka, borne being engaged in Jiiiuning the river, wiiile others seemed to be doing pretty well on the flats adjoining. To-day a party of fivu relumed, and reported that they had been nut for a month working in the gullies iunuini; into the • Molyneux, and above its junction with the Tuapeka. .They state they have a fair prospect of doing well, and that they have only come in for provisions, iutending to return a3 soon an the&a san be obtahieJ. Where they have been at work lie 3 tbout southwest from the junction of Gabriel's aud Wctherstones, and is distant, in a direct :iue, about ten miles, although, unless the country is familiar to the traveller, it will bifce over 15 to reach it. Wetherstoue's flat is being gradually ivorked down towards the junction, and .'many are loing well. The miners complain bitterly that they ire always beiug swamped out by every storm, and shut lots of ground that would pay well is thus renlered unworkable. It is to be hoped the Government will, without any tantalising delay, have a btorm vater channel cut, into which not only tho superabundant water, but the sludge, may flow, and be carried ofl' to the sea. During the past week we have had rain almost ;very day ; and as I now write," the constant drip from the eaves is a reminder that it has not ceased. It would be interesting.to know how many days in ;iie year_work can be carried on in Otago, iv order to letermine the exact cost of the gold produced. Per' inps some of your statisticians in Dunedia could, sup<he requisite information.