MAGISTERIAL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7360, 24 March 1902, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, March 24. % (Before Mr N. K. Bowden; J.P., and Mr T. Gapes, J.P.) . * DiiuraENNKSS.— For this offence a first offender, who did not appear, was fined 5s and costs, in default twenty-ftfur hours' imprisonment. — James CroMey, who has been in the hospital since March 2, suffering from a broken bone in the ankle, was fined 10s and costs, in default forty-eight hours' imprisonment. PuoHißiTioif Ordeb. — On the application of a man, a prohibition, order was granted against his wife, to take effect in Christchurch amd surrounding districts for twelve months. (Before Mr R. Beefcham, S.M.) Default Casks.— ln the following cases the defendants did not appear, and judgment was given for the plaintiffs for the amounts claimed with costs: — Stringer and Cresswell (Mr Crcsswell) v. William White, claim £1 Is ; Booth, Macdonald and Co. (Mr Brjges) •v. Alexander Hr.i-per. £73 18s 3d ; W. Bush and Son v. E. Minifie, £1 19s 4d; Christchurch City Council v. John M'Ccrmick, £11 7s lOd. A Disputed Claim. — William Bailey sued Thomas White for the sum of £14 12s Bd, alleged to be due on a number of transactions bstween the parties. Of this amount the defendant had paid £13 11s 5d into Court, and Mr DonneJJy, who appeared for him, explained that the only amounts in dispute were an extra charge of £d «ach on 234 new sacks and a charge of £1 for storing oats. After hearing the evidence of both parties, Mr Beetham gave judgment for plaintiff for the amount paid into Court, defendant to be allowed costs. A Baker's Bill. — T. Suminerton (Mr Francis) sued J. Smethurst for the sum of £1 Is Bd. This was alleged to be the cost of some bran supplied by the plaintiff, and an extra charge made on defendant's bread bill for his failing to pay cash. Judgment was given for plaintiff for 12s sd, costs lo be equally divided between the parties.