MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6541, 9 May 1889, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

CHRISTCHURCH. This Day. (Before R. Beetham, Esq., R.jtf.) Maintenance Casks. — Mary Jane Fifczpatrick charged Maurice Fitzpatrick, her husband, with habitual drunkenness and cruelty towards her. She asked for the protection of her earnings and the custody and maintenance of her three youngest children. Mi-Joynt appeared for the complainant, and showed that she had three young children, and five others. The eldest of the three young ones was a girl about eight years old. Defendant workud on a farm in the country at coutract work, and earned between 25a and 003 per week, but he paid very little or this to hia wife, and drank most of it. Complainant owned most of the furniture in the house, paid for out of the earnings of herself and her sons. John Fitzpatrick (fifteen), a eon of the parties.sworethathesaw his father when drunk knock his mother down several times, and he bit witness' hand when in a state o£ drunken frenzy. These acts were caused by rage, because they could give their father no money. John Leadley, father to complainant, swore that his daughter came away from her home and took refuge with him, in consequence of defendant's treatment. The Bench made an order for 15s per week to bo paid by defendant in support of his youngest daughter, and that a prohibition order be issued against him. — Michael. Geogehan was charged with assaulting Jane Geogehan on April 19, and was further charged with habitual drunkenness and cruelty towards her. She asked for a protection order over her earnings, the maintenance and custody of two children, and the custody of & third, fifteen years of ago. Defendant was ordered to give surety, himself in .£25 and another in a similar amount, to keep the peace towards her for six months. The protection order and custody of the children was granted, and he was ordered to pay 20s per week in their support. — James Johnston was charged by his wife with habitual drunkenness, and cruelty towards her, and Bhe prayed for a protection orderand the custody of two young children, and an order for their maintenance. The protection and custody order 3 were niade, and he was ordered to pay 15s a week towards thoir keep. Civil Cases. — John Plaisted and Co. v. Thomas Frame, claim £1- ; judgment for oliiintiff by default- — A.itt. - ur Johnston v. Thomas Johnston, claim .£l2 2s lOd; adjourned to May 23.— James Gibson v. Edward Joblin, claim .£SO 18s 6d; adjourned to May 15.— -J. D. Phillips v. T. J. Hudson, claim £o 10s ; adjourned to May 16.— E. H. Shirley v. T. White, claim £1 ISs Id ; judgment for plaintiff for amount of claim and costs. — H. Johnston v. Joseph Cox, claim £1 ; judgment for plaintiff by default. — Thomas Taylor v. W. Mills, claim .£2; judgment for plaintiff by default. — Thomas Taylor v. A. C. Ward, claim .£6 14s; judgment for plaintiff by default. — Christ's College v. John Carroll, claim .£6 16a; judgment summons. Defendant did not appear, and an order was made for immediate payment to be. made; in default three weeks' imprisonment. — Robert Scott v. T. Ball, claim .£1 14s j judgment summons. Ordered to pay amount forthwith, or in default one week's imprisonment. — Richard Thomas Lees v. William Forster, claim £8. Mr M'Connel for plaintiff ; Mr Bruges for defendant. Plaintiff was recently clerk to Mr H. S. Austin, solicitor, and when the latter discontinued business in Christchurch, he owed plaintiff a considerable sum of money for wages. In settlement of this amount Austin assigned various book debts to plaintiff, amongst which was a earn alleged to have been advanced by Austin to Forster. Dofendant said he required a loan to pay off money due by him to the Standard Investment Association, amounting to .£75. They agreed to take .£7l if paid in one Eurn. He went to Messrs Ayers and Wagstaff, the trustees in M'Queen's estate, who agreed to advance .£S4 193, which sum they had for investment. This amount was paid to Austin. Det'end.iut handed Austin la to make the amount up to ,£BS. There was something due to Austin for costs, and at witness' request the balance over and above the .£7l and costs was paid by Austin to defendant, who received £9. The amount was never paid by Austin to the Standard Investment .Association owing to a hitch about the release of the j mortgage, and defendant could never ! get any satisfaction from Austin. Aaron Ayers said he was trustee in M'Queen's estate, and consented ,to lend the amount of £84> 19s to Forster, on the security offered by Forster, on the strict understanding that the amount due to the Standard Association was to ba paid off ac once. Hearing that this was not done, witness repeatedly called on Austin to put mutters straight. So far as his knowledge j won!", the money had not been repaid, i im", lie had been told that part of the i inor.';y had been paid into the Supreme Oour". Noel Francis, of the Standard Investment Association, also gave evidence. Mr M'Connel, solicitor for the i M'Q ueons' estate, said that Austin had j accounted for the money by paying J-S5 j into the Supreme Court. - Judgment for plaintiff for £S and costs.