Magisterial.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 139, 22 October 1868, Page 2

Magisterial.

♦ CHRISTCHURCH.

This Dat. (Before C. C. Bowen, Esq., R.M.) Drunkenness. — William Sharman was brought up in custody charged with having been drunk and incapable, yesterday. Prisoner admitted .the offence, and expressed his contrition with a promise not to offend again. Being his first appearance, and having been locked up all night, he was discharged with a caution. Hobse Stealing. — Leeaon Powell, a halfcast.e who had been set at liberty in order to procme money for paying the flue imposed upon him for thi3 offence, not appearing when called upon, his Worship ordered a wurrant to be issued for his arrest. Cattle Trespass. — The following fines were imposed for cattle foind trespassing on public thoroughfares within the precincts of theoity: — C. Dnlwood, two horses at large on the South Town belt, ss; James M'Kenzie, who diil not appear, four cows nt large on the same belt, 20s; John Wilson, one horse, tethered in Montreal-street, ss; James Bell,tffO cows tethered on the South Town Belt, 10s; Hugh Jardine, two cows at large on the same belt. ss; Alfred Piper, two horses at large in Cashei-street, ss ; Wm. Lawrence, one horse tuthered in Montreal-street, 10s; and C. 1 >ale, two horaea at large on the Ferry-road, 10s. Breach op the Hackney Carriage Ordinance. — William Slurton was charged with having plied for hire contrary to the provisions of his license. Constable O'Conuorsaid the accused was driver of a 'bus belonging co C. Dalwood, and licensed to run from the Railway station to the Junction Hotel. On the day named in the information, he turned round "at the Post-office and went back to the station, instead of going, the whole distance. Witness did n< t see him take up a passenger

after leaving the Post-office, but he put some down just before getting there. It. Falloon vras called to prove that accused took up a passenger on returning to the Railway station, but it appeared to hare been upward* of an hour and a-half after the constable saw him turn round at the Post-office. In excuse for not going the whole distance stipulated in his license, ac( used said the day was very wet, and his horses young ones. 11 is Woiship said he was not satisfied from the cvi lence that accused had plied for hire after turning back from the Post-office, and the case would therefore be dismissed. Bobert Falloon, owner of a 'bus, also running to and from the Railway Station, was charge!, on the information o? C. Dalwood, with a similar offence. Informant sail on the 1 2th inst. he saw accused drivu from the Station to the Golden Age Hote', and after deliverin r three parcels, turn back again without going the full distance prescribed by his licence. Accused- admitted the offence, but pleaded that it was ruid-<iay, and he was going home to dinner. There was no evidence as to accused having taken up a passenger, but his Worship said the police could not always be lo king after drivers to know wheth r they took up fares after turning back at half their stipulated distance, an<i inflcted a fine of 10s. %£Abusivk Language. — An+be»y Jamr appeared in answer to an adjourned information j charging him with having used abusive language to Mary Ann Bradshaw. Complainant was not in attendance when called, and his Worsßip dismissed the casp, with a strong caution to. accused not to interfere with women in the* streets again, or be would be bound over to keep the peace. At a later period, complainant entered the Courf, and said she was at the Clarendon when the case was called. His Worship replied that he could not countenance persons going to drink during Court hours, and confirmed his dismissal of the case. Perjury. — Richard Taylor appeared in an--Bwerto an information charging him with having committed perjury in a civil action heard on Wednesday week. Mr Joynt appeared for the informant Mr J. H. Caton, and Mr Wynn William* defended. W. Burke, bailiff of the Court, said the documents produced are the summons and record of judgment given on the 14th irstant in the case of Graham and Hockley, as trustees of R. Taylor's estate, v. J. H. Caton. The accused was a witness on behalf of the plaintiffs, and was sworn in the usual form. In my capa ity of bailiff, I act as administrater of oaths in this Court. Judgment was g : ven in the case for plaintiffs with costs. John Henry Caton : I urn a farmer, residing near the Horseshoe Lake. I was defendant in the case of Hockley & Graham v. J. H. Caton. The action was brought :o recover £33 93 6d, which I had received out. of the estate of Richard Taylor as half the bill of costs produced. The first three items in the bill ■were for solicitor's fees in preparing a deed of partnership between myself and accused. I heard accused give evidence in the case on behalf of plaintiffs, and remember him saying in reference to the charges alleprfd to have been incurred in connection with the partnership •' that he had nothing to do with anythiDg of the kind, as he knew me too well to become partner with me ; that he would on no account have gone into par'nership with me ; and that he never made any agreement to do so. I afterwards heard Mr J. S. Williams give evidence in the same casa. He said that he had seen an agreement to enter into partnership with me signed by accused. He said Mr Parkinson had dra^rn the agreement vp, and it als > bore his signature. After this evidence, accused waa recalled by the Court, and he again denied any knowledge of the partnership, or having signed an agreement for one. He gave his evidence deliberately, and with apparent confi-lence. I remember the agreement for a partnership between myself and accused. It was drawn out by Mr Parkinson, and is now produced. It is for a partnership ,as carcase butchers, and signed by myself and accused together, with J. H. Parkinson and B. Pearson as •witnesses. I cannot say whether there were frequent conversations between us previous to the agreement being drawn up, but I know there was gome talk about it. His Worship here said he did not know whether Mr Joynt had other witnesses to call, but from the evidence of informant, he was of opinion that there was no appearance of a case, and further, from his recollection of the action in which the perjury was alleged to have been committed, he did not think a case could be made out. Mr Joynt said he had witnesses to prove frequent conversations having taken plac : between accused and Caton respecting the partner- hip, and he considered that he had a very clear case. His Worship repeated his farmer remarks, and the case then dropped.