Wednesday, June 20.

West Coast Times, Issue 234, 22 June 1866, Page 2

Wednesday, June 20.

Drunk and Disorderly. — John Seaton and John Smith were fined, the former ss. for being drunk, and 15s. for disorderly conduot, or twenty-four hours imprisonment Utter, being an old offender, ss. fdr being drunk, and .£2 for disorderly conduct, with the alternative of four days' imprisonment with hard labor.

Breach op Police Oboinanoe. — Thos. Potts charged^ by Mrs Grace Francis, with using threatening and abusive language calculated to provoke a breach of the peace, by saying to her, the defendant— having a bar of iron in his hand at the time — " I will knock your brains out." Mr South appeared for the defendant, who was fined £5.

t Laiiceny.— William Lockwood and William Keane were charged with stealing a pair of trousers, of the value of 30s. William Jones sworn, stated that he was an auctioneer, residing at the Golden Age Hotel, Revell street 5 and that on the 18th instant he gave the servant girl a pair of trousers to wash. He saw them on tho clothes line in the yard at about 4 o'clock that afternoon ; and on the next day the witness saw them again thrown across the ridgo-polo of a tent close to the Tramway Hotel, llevell street. The trousers were produced, and identified by the witness. John Nelson also deposed to having seen them on a clothes-line in the yard at the Golden Age Hotel. Sergeant Dyer, sworn, stated that he had found the trousers thrown over the tent in which both the prisoners were Bleeping, The witness knew the prisoner Lockwocd, and had seen him at tho tent frequently, and believed he lived there. The prisoner Keane told the; witness ho had gone up to the tont to sleep off th,o effects of a orunken spree. Keane was here discharged ; but Lockwood,

who stated that he had been at a ball held at the Shakespeare Hotel, where Sergeant Dyer said he had seen him, was remanded until to-day, to allow him to procure the attendance of a witness.

Obtaining goods bt false prktences. — William Conßtantine was placed in the dock to answer this chargo, itiade 1 against him by Williaih Beck;— William James LoßkWoodj sWorH, deposed that; in tlio early part of the rhonth tf April last lie was cobk at the Royal Hotel, Revellstreet 1 , kept ,by. Mrs Jtoati. .About that time the prosefcutorj Beck; gave a tiox containing jtap^rs, and a carpet bag containing clothes, into his charge, and requested him to take care of them until he called for them? About three weeks afterwards he called upon the witness, who was then residing at the Glasgow Hotel, and told him that he had seen Beck on the Three Mile Diggings, and that he had requested him to see the Witness and ask llini for. nis cldthes; in drder that he might v tdke>them.ttp to him. Lite Witness hesitated giving them up at fii'st, but on the prisoner calling again two days afterwards he sent him to the Royal Hotel to fetch them, and at the same time told him to bring them to him, and he would put a label on them. The property was accordingly handed over to him on his representation. The witnesu iden* tified the part of the goods produced in Court) and stated that he had known the prisoner for the last eight months; dhd-wfts ftssistant-Qpok,,^; Ryan's, Hqtel when Beck left his pVoperfcy there. William Beck, sworn— deposed that ho was a miner, residing on the Three Mile Diggings, and that in the early part of the month of April ho had Jeft a canvas bag and a carpet bag, containing various articles of clothing, as well as a box containing & pocket-book, letters, und papers, in the charge of the last witness^ Look Wood ;. T)ie. Witness knew J,he pMednfcrj bitt liaO never authorised him to remove tiny of his property. Ho identified the property produced in Court; and valued it at from fifty-six to fiftvrfieven, .pounds, #ndgma,n Bolton gob t oßc4 that he was a cobilaole of police, stationed at Hokitika, and arrested the prisoner at M'Clintock's accommodation house, on the 10th instant. The witness found the articles now produced in the prisoner's possession, who said that they had been sent up to him by mistake, and he had not been able to send them back dgaltu The" pfiaohetf Said tliat he had mfet the prosecutor 6n ,the T,liree Mile Diggings; when he told Him 1 to fetch the things that he ha.d left ,in Eockwopd's charge up to liiml rThe prisoner waa committed to take his trial at the ensuing Criminal Sessions of the Supreme Court, to be holden at Hokitika.

CIVII, CASKS.

Lewis v Woods.— For goods supplied. Judgment, by default, for the full amount claimed and costs (Lll 5s 6d). Matthies v Hankins. — For gooda gupplied. Judgment) by default) for Lls lsi and CDStS.

TiiuKSDAY, , June 2^; DRuiik and Disorderly. — Richard White and William Trounce were both fined ,5s fojr. being drunk and J.ss, for, disorderly cpnductf.or fn default 48 hours imprisonment with bard labor* LAboeny.— William Lockwood, on remand from the 24th inst.. charged with stealing a pair of trousers from a clothes line in the yard at the Golden Age Hotel, Revell-street, belonging to a lodger, Mr Jones, was sentenced to one months' imprisonment with hard labon . , 'crVib BasMS.. . Henderson and Bonaf v;,M6rls6u; Law, & Co.— This was an .actym.for L 46 8s l.ld, commission claimed to be due fyopi defendants for agency connected with tlte wreck" of the Oik.; Mr South for plaintiffs ; Mr Rees for defendants. Jaraps Alexander Bonar, sworn, stated, that in May, 1865, Mr Adam, who was the sole, representative of defendants • came^o ihta.and p^fonpsed that he and '.witness -snould dot together in superintending the landing of the cargo of the Oak, which had been wrecked. Mr Adam proposed this because witness understood that kind of business better than he did. Witness accordingly did all that was necessary, and paid the accounts out of his own motieys. Same time after, Mr M'lntyre succeeded Mr Adam, and went into .the adcou&ts.Jvith.Adijm rfud /jvittie&s, and the Claim in this action wa§ agr^d to be due ft6m iJie firm to witness. One evening Mr M'lntyre came- to witness 1 office, and said that if he (Mr Bonar) would settle the account in his hands he would, on the following morning, give witness a 1 cheque for his commission. On witness going to him on the following day, M'lntyre said that he was prevented from...f^filling his promise in consequence of instructions from, Mr Law, anano park of. tile amount had been paid. Witness produced his accounts, which were put into court. Several witnesses for defendants were examined, and cross-examined, but as the evidence went dearly to establish the plaintiffs' claim, after counsel had addressed the Court. ti\e Reßident,Magiß.trate gdve judgment For' the plaintiffs, with costs. M'Beath v. Munce. — For goods supplied. Judgment by consent for LH 5s 6d, and costs. Binney & Co. v. Zealand.— Mr Button appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr Rees for the defendant. The plaintiffs sought to recover the sum of LSO, damage sustained on sugar shipped per s.s. Thane from Greymouth. Judgment for the de» fendant, with costs. Kreitmayer v. Wood'— Mr Rees appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Button for the defendant. The plaintiff claimed to recover the sum of LOO for loss and damage caused by the wilful destruction of a wax figure, representing the late Mr Kinder (son-iu«law to the defendant) exhibited by him on the 11th inst. in Revell street. It appeared the defendant called upon the plaintiff, and informed him of the relationship that existed between the late Mr Kinder and himself, and at the same time cautioned him, that if he exhibited the figure he would destroy it, which he accordingly did the samo evening. The plaintiff valued the figure at from L 25 to L3O. The balance claimed, (L2O) was for loss sustained in trade, in consequence of its destruction. In answer to a question put by tho Bench, the plaintiff said that fie valued the figure a,t L2O, the wig at L 4, and tho eyes at Ll. Cross* examined by Mr Button— Had valued the figure at LlO when he gave the defendant in {charge at the watch-house, but when the case came before the Court* on the Monday he valued it at L2O 5 for when he gave the defendant in chargo he had not ascertained the amount of damage the figure had sustained. The plaintiff stated

that there was about a pound's worth of wax in the figure, and that the wig was destroyed and porfectly useless. Mr Button here addressed the Court, and stated that a similar case had taken place in Launceßton, when it was decided that the Value of the material of which the figure was Cdntjibsedi Cdtild Only be" recovered, but that no claim could be made of re-* covered for the figure as a work of art, as it was a libel. Mr Rcqs Said it was nbt.d libel oar 1 caricature, ,but merely -a sample^ model, and Held the defendant bad b'eeii guilty of trdstfafa ana malicious injury. Judgment was given for L2O and costs. Scanlan vW. and G. Gray.— Mr Campbell appeared for the plaintiff. Judgment for L 73 and costs (amount of the plaintiff's dishonored promissory note). Clarke Bros, v Johnston.— Mr Rees appeared for the . plaintiff, and Mr p'Lotighlin for the defendant. Judgment for L2O 2s, 'balance due for twenty-fdur" wefeks' rent of an office at L2 ( per.weeL ,1 Quail v Fisher:— Mr Campbell appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Button for the defendant. The plaintiff sought to recover the sum of L 64 3s 4d, for wages due as master of the schooner Lloyd's Herald, at L 25 per month, and for detention in consequence of their non-payment. It will be recollected that the schooner was sold a short time ago, by order of the sheriff, and the 4ueß'tidri was merely as to whether tne defendant was the party liable. . .Onth'ti ?spt>y% sheriff. of Mr. Throc'kniohb^a interest, it was purchased by Mr William I'isher (of Fisher Bros), who immediately afterwards sold it to Mr Taggart. Mr. Taggart, in his evidence, stated that he had purchased as agent for a principal undisclosed, and further admitted having paid, through Mr Fisher, the wages of two of tho seamen, and having offered the plaintiff wagen at the rate of Lls pgfj raqjith: %he plaintiff's sb'licitb'r contended that any one of the owners was liable, and argued upon his client's, right to elect whom he would sue. The Magistrate reserved^his judgment until to-day. , Akerley. ,v Ei&er.was^a.clainiior timber and iron supplied 1 to . repair^ the tiloyd'^ Herald. The evidence was the same as in the last oase, and the Magistrate's decision was also reserved until to-day. In the cases of Brown, Neale, and Co, v Johnston, Turnbull v Marks and Harris. Marks and Fuerst v Marks and Harris, Wilson M'Nally v Harper. Shepherd v Marks and Harris, Twist v tyt'&ay, Shetia herd v Marks and Harris, Ma^ks atid Co* v Holmes, Chesney and Co v' Kofalt, there was no, appearance of plaintiffs or defendants. , „ , »' , t „ j ,„.. ... The Cdurt. was adjodrHed uiitii elefett o'clock this day.