MAGISTERIAL.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2929, 15 August 1882, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

‘ ■y TEMUKA-YESTERDAY. (Before' J. D. Barker, and J. Mendelson, Esq.’s). KKQIiHCT OF VACCINATION.' Isaac Greenaway, charged with neglecting to comply with the Act in not having bis child vaccinated, said he did not believe in vaccination and would not have it performed on the child. He would leave the country or send the child away. He was fined forty shillings and informed that a further failure to comply would entail another fine.

Civil CASES. I Gumming and Hayes v. J. Williams, claim £2 16s 6d. Mr Johnston for plaintiffs. The defendant pleaded that he was not liable,the medical attendance having been rendered to his wife before marriage, she being a minor and her parents therefore liable. Judgment was given for plaintiffs for amount claimed with costs' £1 8s 6d. TIMARU—THIS DAY. (Before J Beswick, Esq., R.M. and E. El worthy, Esq.) DEUNKENNESS. John Reid was fined 5s for this offence. THEOWINO CLAY AT A TRAIN, Two lads, George (10), and Walter John (7) Burford, were charged with throwing lumps of clay at a railway train, near Peeress Town. They were both discharged with a severe caution. LUNACY. S. Barkly, on remand, was committed to the Asylum, on the certificates of Drs Lovegrove and Hassall. bbeAch of licensing act 1881. Francis Franks was charged with selling one dozen porter to John Meikle, without a license. The police prosecuted, and defendant conducted bis own case. The following evidence was taken Francis James Harris, bottler to defendant, deposed to the sale of the porter to Mr Meikle. John Meikle, licensee of the Grosvenor Hotel, said he received the porter as alleged. Sergeant Cullen said he went to defendant’s store on the 4th, and enquire whether he had a wholesale license, and was told that he had hot, but that he relied on the ordinary license to cover all his business in Timaru. His Worship dismissed the case, as the information had been laid against the son as manager and not the father as proprietor. Police v. Taylor and Bowie. Mr White appeared for defendants and said this was a case in which defendants were charged witli selling two gallons of port wine to one, Lawrence Edwards, not having complied with the Licensing Act by taking out a license under it.. Th§y held a license under the Distillation Act, and held that to bo sufficient. He admitted the sale and all the facts, but contended that the license held by defendants sufficiently imdemnified them in the matter. The license had been issueeb by the Collector of Customs before the Licensing Committee were elected. His Worship adjourned the case till Thursday week. CIVIL CASES’ Judgment was entered for the plaintiff in the following cases;— G. Cliff v, J, Nelson, claim £3 19s ; R. Stansell v. Hehry, claim £l3 3s 9d ; W. Stonyer v. J. Huband, claim £1 4s; Bank of New South Wales v. Denis Heffernan, claim £43 7s 8d ; Bundesen v. Waldron, claim £4 18s 4d. In the case Turnbull r. Webb, claim £l3s 6d, judgment was entered for plaintiff for £1 and costs. Mary Dowd v. J. McLaughlan, claim £33 4o 2d, for wages. Defendant put in a set off. After bearing evidence judgment was entered for plaintiff for £l6 3s 6d and costs. ?