MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5617, 13 May 1886, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

CHRISTCHURCH.

This Day. (Before J. Ollivier, Esq., R.M., R. Westenra, and C. Louisson, E6qs.) Juyenilb Offenders. — Robert Pender, Victor Sellars, Alfred Hawker, and Herbert Lawrence, four boys, aged between 12 and 9 years, were charged with breaking into and stealing from the premises of C. Jennings, nuts, apples, and pears, to the value of £2. Sellare, Lawrence, and J. Parker were accused of stealing rubber balls from the shop of Mr E. A. Garnett, Cashel street. On Sunday, May 2, a i>arty of boys, of whom Pender was ringeader, forced a window of the store at the back of Mr Dunning's fruit shop in Cashel street, and helped themselves to the contents. The balls had been abstracted from a net full of Buch articles hanging in front of Mr Garnett's shop. Both the owners asked the Bench to deal leniently. Sellars and Lawrence were not much to blame. The Bench administered a severe caution to the boys, especially Pender, and allowed them to go. Sheep infested with Lice. — For being the owners of sheep infested with lice in the Addington Saleyard, W. Attwood, W. Hartnell, and R. Gilling were fined .£1 each and costs. In a similar case against Isaac Boorman accused of being the owner of twenty of such sheep, Mr Joyce appeared for the defendant, and put the prosecution to the proof of defendant's ownership of the sheep. Mr Wright, of Matson and Co., produced the record of their sheep sale on April 21, the day in question. This showed that defendant had purchased twenty sheep which Mr Bolton, Sheep Inspector, asserted, were infested with the lice. Defendant said he knew nothing of the sheep. There had been several auctioneers selling that day, and he had bought about 80 sheep, which his slaughterman took away. Mr Joyce submitted that the case was not one for a penalty ; the sheep had never been in Mr Boorman'a possession. The original owner, who brought them to the yards, should have been proceeded against. The Bench had no doubt after Mr Wright's evidence that defendant was the owner of the sheep, but considering the circumstances the case would be dismissed. AUiBOED BbBACH OP EDUCATION ACT. — A caße in which J. Gerkin, of Tai Tapu, I was charged with failing to send a child to j the district school during half the school I year, was dismissed. Mr Joyce appeared for the defendant, and elicited the fact that the child waa only seven years old (the minimum school age) last February, j and yet the Chairman of the Committee, j Mr Blank, laid an information in May for j the child not attending half the preceding I year. Mr Ollivier remarked that such pro- ■ ceedings were only calculated to bring the Education Act into contempt. Mr Blank said the Committee had brought the case before the Court in order to know what j was their duty in the matter. Mr Ollivier j advised the Committee to study the Act, > *nd dismissed the information. Thb Fbbbt Bridqb Disturbance. — Three informations, in which Daniel Burns was accused of using indecent language, obstructing the Ferry road whereby life , and limb were likely to be endangered, and assaulting Arthur Senior on Sunday last, wer« adjourned by arrangement of Messrs Stringer and Weaton, the solicitors engaged, till the following day. A fourth information, in which Arthur Senior was charged with assaulting Mrs Burns, was likewise postponed. Miscellaneous. — For having unregistered dogs in their possession, G. Checkley was fined J6I,A. Cockburn 10s, and G. Pike 5s. — For setting fire to gorse in a public road at Lincoln, contrary to the Police Offences Act, G. M. Topham was fined 6a. — D. Nielson was fined 5s for allowing a cow to wander, and T. Boyd jBl, including 2s 6d witness' expenses, for leaving a horse and vehicle unattended. — Henry Harris, for riding a tricycle, and W. Carew, for riding a bicycle on the Papanui road footpath, were fined 10a each. — Robert Wheatley was ordered to pay 7e 6d per week towarda the support of his wife, Mary Wheatley. — John Whiteside, who did not appear, was ordered to pay £1 per week towards the support of his wife and four children. — Mr Kippenberger applied for a re-hearing of the case Toon v. Toon, in which Mr Ollivier had made an order ; fifteen months ago for defendant to contribute to the support of his wife. Mr Salter appeared to oppose. The Bench granted the application, and fixed May 27 as the day of hearing.