MAGISTERIAL.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 5018, 28 May 1889, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

TlMAET7—Tuesday, 38th May. (Before 0. A. Wray Esq, E.M.) DEDNKENKEBS. A first offender was fined ss. A man named Chappie, who was up yesterday, was fined 20s. CIVIX. CASES. P. W. Eihy, (as agent) v. Waters, claim for £2 rent duo, and for order for possession of premises. Case struck out, the claim for possession being made under a wrong section of the Act. P. Bundesen v. J. Oullamore, claim £1 7s fid. Defendant’s wife admitted owing 17s fid. One lot of coal charged for, 10s, was paid for at the time; she sent the money by the boy, who gave it to Mrs Bundesen. Plaintiff said he never received it nor heard of it. His Worship thought the payment of the 10s not proved and gave judgment for the amount claimed.

P. W. Hutton and Co. v. Miss Jolly, claim 8s 3d for “ Young Ladies’ Journal ” delivered 1887-8. Defendant denied giving an order, under which plaintiff claimed, for delivery of the journals, and denied receiving more than threb, which had been paid for ; she even expressly declined' to give an order. Plaintiff ecu's not swear that jibe order was given ; an 'order was entgped in the magazine book.' IJe pould not swear to the delivery of any magazine, as they were delivered by boys, and no receipt was taken. His Worship did not consider the plaintiff’s case proved in face of defendant’s denial, and a nonsuit was entered. Same v. P. Byson, 15s fid, judgment by default, A SMUG GLEE. George Matthews, a wharf labourer, was charged with having in his possession last night a box of 221bs of manufactured tobacco (“ Janus ” plugs) on which duty had not been paid, whereby he had incurred a penalty of £IOO, for which the Deputy Commissioner of Customs elected to sue.

Defendant pleaded guilty. Mr Cooper,'the prosecutor, stated that defendant was met by Sergeant Liyingatqno last evening after dark coming up the wharf, carrying aparpel! The Sergeant asked vphat lie had there, and demanding to see it, it turned out to be the box of manufactured tobacco in court, He had examined tho box and there was no “ duty paid " stamp on it. Defendant admitted that he got the box from the Janet Nicoll, which was in fact the only foreign going vessel then in port. The penalty was either £IOO, or three times the value of tho goods, duty paid, and he had elected to sue for the £IOO.

His Worship pointed out that he could reduce tho penalty to one-fourth. Mr Cooper expressed regret that this defendant and not some other had been caught. He was quite a young man and had perhaps been led into it, induced to go. Defendant told him ho was informed he could get a bit of cheap tobacco on the vessel and ho went to get a single pound, but was t)ld ho could not have a pound, he must take a box. The value of the tobacco, duty paid, would be at least £3. It was usual in such cases to reduce the penalty to £25, and in such a case as this, that penalty would be sufficient. It was undoubtedly a hardship on this man ; the principal offender was not before the -Court j this man wtis a scapegoat for shine one else who had induced him to break tho law. !i Defendant, who had pleaded guilty, said he had nothing to say. The penalty sued for, reduced to £25 was inflicted} in default of payment *•' imprisonment until paid,” A second charge of “ unshipping uncustomed goods ” was withdrawn. ' ’The fine was paid by some of defendant’s I friepde.