Magisterial.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 163, 19 November 1868, Page 3

Magisterial.

— — ♦ CHRISTCHURCH. This Day. (Before C. C. Bowen, Esq., R.M.) Assault. — George Long was brought up custody, charged with having violently assaulted his wife, with the intent to do her grievous bodily harm. Complainant appeared in Court with her head bound up, and the assault was proved to have been of the most brutal kind. Accused had struck her with a heavy kitchen chair, and threatened to shoot her with a gun whicli he pointed at her, and which was loaded and capped at the time. The defence by prisoner was that complainant had thrown the chair at him, and otherwise agravated him. His Worship considered tho case fully proved, and committed prisoner to three months' imprisonment at hard labour, remarking at the same time that he was not fully satisfied whether or not prisoner ought to be committed for trial. Breaches of the Stage Cabriaoe Ordinance. — Robert Falloon appeared i n answer to three informations for infringing the terms of the Stage Carriage Ordinance. The first was for plying for hire between the White Hart Hotel and the Agricultural Show grounds, without having the necessary notice painted on his vehicle. William Simmons proved the offence, and it appeared that accused, who usually runs a 'bus between the Railway-station and Post-office, had taken out a license for running from the White Hart Hotel to the Agricultural Show grounds, on the 10th inst. He had a printed bill on the side of the 'bus, but the ordinance provided that thenotice of licence should be painted on the vehicle itself. Christopher Dalwood corroborated the informant's evidence and the placard was produced in Court. The second information was for plying for hire between the Railway and Post-office on the same day. The evidence showed that his 'bus having been licensed to run from the White Hart to tbe Show grounds, his original license for the Railway and Post-office had lapsed, and that his running to and from the latter places was consequently a breach of the

I ordinance. The third information was for conveying passengers to the Volunteer encampment on the 9th inst., without having the necessary license. Constable Connor proved to seeing accused drive a 'bus load of passengers up the North Road, and it appeared that he had not obtained a license for it. In reply to the first charge, accused said that he had been informed by tbe police, when taking out his license, that the printed bills would be sufficient, and in reply to the third he said that he applied for the necessary license, but could not get it in consequence of the Government offices being closed. The clerk at the depot had, however, told him that, having applied for the license, he could run, and the license would afterwards be issued. The clerk was called, but denied both the statements. He had told accused that the terms of the license must be painted on his bus in the first instance, and in the second he had said he would send the license over to the Government buildings, and try and get it signed, but did not authorise him in any way to run his vehicle before begot it in his possession. His Worship said as he had frequently before stated it was only left for him to carry out the law, and seeing the many offences there were against it, he could not do it otherwise than in the very strictest sense. Accused would be fined 10s on each charge. Breach op the City By-Laws.— William Howard was charged with having obstructed a public thoroughfare, by permitting his licensed vehicle to remain in front of the City Hotel for a period of fifteen minutes. The informing constable said the cart was between the stand and the hotel, and even if engaged would almost have been as convenient on the latter as where it was. He spoke to accused who then moved away. Accused admitted the offence, but said he was engaged by Mr Osborne and waiting for some things he was to take from the hotel. A witness was called to prove that accused had applied at the bar for some spirits he said he was to take away for Mr Osborne, but there was none there, and he then replied that, having agreed to see Mr Osborne at the hotel, he would wait till he came. His Worship said accused had evidently gone at first for goods, but he had no right to keep his vehicle standing there as he had done. The minimum penalty under the Ordinance was 10s, and considering the extenuating circumstances, he was loath to inflict it in addition to the other expenses. The case would therefore be dismissed, the accused paying the witness ss. Breach of the Hackney Carriage Ordinance. — Henry Best was charged with having carried eleven passengers in his vehicle, whist only licensed to carry five. Accused admitted the offence, and was fined 10s. Christopher Dal wood answered to an information preferred against him for leaving his cab unattended in a public thoroughfare. Constable Connor and Sergeant Pardy proved to seeing the cab in front of the City Hotel, without anyone being in charge of it. After watching for several minutes he saw Dalwood come out of the bar and drive away. Accused pleaded in defence that he had requested two of the cabmen in charge of vehicles on the stand in front of the Hotel to look after his cab, and they promised to do so. W. Dunn and A. McTaggart corroborated this evidence, and said they were watching the cab all the time accused was away. They did not remain quite close to it, but could easily have stopped the horse if it had tried to move away. Sergeant Pardy said these witnesses were on the opposite side of their vehicles to that on which defendant's cab was, and they admitted it, but still urged that they had full command over the horse. His Worship said the ordinance distinctly meant that the cabman should not leave his cab at all, when accused stated that he had not actually done so. He did not go into the hotel but merely stood at the door and called for a drink. He was on the pavement the whole of the time. A passenger who had engaged the cab and had requested accused to stop at the hotel for refreshment, corroborated this, and said accused had told him that he dare not leave his cab to go in for a drink, but must stand at the door to wait for it. His Worship said there had no doubt been a breach of the law, but accused had evidently been under the impression that he was taking care of his cab, and seeing the expense he would be put to in paying his witnesses, the Bench would dismiss the case. He must, however, understand that in future the law would be as strictly enforced in such matters as it had been necessary to do in respect to the Hackney Carriage offences. Breaches of the Public House Ordinancb. — W. D. Barnard pleaded guilty to two informations preferred against him for supplying liquors during prohibited hours, and permitting gambling in hia licensed house. His Worship fined him £5 for each offence. BREACn OF THB POLICE ORDINANCE.— Margaret Bowen and Mary Holmes were charged with fighting in Eilmore street on the 9th inst. Two witnesses proved the offence, and his Worship remarking that it had been a most disgraceful fight, sentenced them to a week's imprisonment each at hard labour. Disorderly Conduct and Obscene Language. — Sarah Ferguson and — Darby appeared in answer to two informations preferred against them by James Carter, for creating a disturbance in a public thoroughfare whilst in a state of intoxication, and making use of obscene language. The accused Ferguson was seized with a fit of hysterics and had to be removed, but both charges being satisfactorily proved, the Bench imposed a fine of 40s on each of the accused. Bbeach of the Cattle Trespass Ordinance. — Ellen Howard was charged with hayiug rescued a cow whilst being taken to the pound for trespass, and satisfactory evidence being given, a fine of 10s and cotts was inflicted.. Wilful and Malicious Damage to Private Property.— Jane Crawford answered

to an information for having broken twelve panes of glass iv a house belonging to Mr John Hart in Kilmore street. She admitted the offence, but pleaded urgently for a dismissal, promising not to offend again. Hig Worship could not accept this, and as fines or imprisonment appeared to have no effect upon accused, he said he would remand her until to-morrow for consideration of the course to be adopted for preventing a recurrence of her conduct. ;.",.-.-.