RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

West Coast Times, Issue 1137, 15 May 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

Feiday, May 14. , (Before G. G. FitzGerald, Esq., R.M.) ! Lunacy. — Emma Williams, on remand, \ charged with being of unsound mind, was, j on the evidence of Dr>; Dcrmott and Acheson, committed to the Lunatic Asj'lum . Bitrvcu ox- Westl.vn» Pcjjlic llousij j Ordinance. — S. M. Salomon appeared on j summon?, charged with keeping his licensed house open at 12.30 a.m., on the sth inst. , Sergeant O'Donnel deposed that on the [ morning of the sth inst., he had seen de- i fendant's licensed house open. Fined 20s and costs. i Brevcii of the Byelvws. — George ; Harker appeared on information, charged ; ! with unlawfully removing sand trom Park- j j street. Sergeant Wilson deposed that he j j had seen the defendant carting away | sand from Fark-stnet on the morning of the 30th ultimo. Defendant i said he had permission from Mr Fiew. j J. Frew deposed that he had given defendant permission to take away a few loads of sand. At the time the police called on , | him he did not know that they meant de- ' fendant. The informations against two other i carters for the same offence were also withdrawn. j Brhack oi' the Pouch Ordinance. — i George Thompson was summoned for havj ing a dirty chimney, and allowing it to take | fire on the 4th inst. Constable Hendrick ■ ; deposed that, he saw defendant's chimney i !on fire on the 4th instnnt. Examined it, j j and found a quantity of soot in the chimj ney. By defendant — There was nearly a ■ I bucketful of soot scattered about on the ' floor. Constable Elliot, gave corroborative , evidence. Defendant pleaded that the ' chimney had been swept three weeks pre- j

. vious, and that he was not responsible tor i I its being dirty. The Clerk of Government I Works was the person who was respon- ' ' sible. The information was dismissed. i Obstructing a Thorocchiwri:. — Alex. ; Fraser was summoned for obstruction, by j keeping his dray in a thoroughfare. De- j fendant was fined ss. ; Wilful Destbuction of Property. — j , James Fitzsimmons was charged with hay- j ing, on the morning of the 11th inst , wil- ' j fully broken the lamp over Mr Itiordan's ' i cufe. Constable Hendrick deposed that, j i about three o'clock on the morning of the ; 11th inst., he saw defendant and others ; pull down a shutter bar and also throw ' stones at the lamp. Witness was quite | certain that defendant was one of the men. ' j Mr Riordan deposed to his street lamp hay- ' j ing been broken on the morning of the I i 11th inst. Defendant denied being one of ! j the parties, and did not call witnesses. lie | j was fined £2 and costs, or, in default, one ! j day's imprisonment. ' ' The defendant was further charged with ' | having, on the same morning, pulled down ' i the iron bars from J. Cosgrave's shop \ • window. Constable Hendrick deposed to i . the defendant being one of the men i i engaged. Mr Coograve g.ivc evidence as | (to the damage clone. Defendant was ! ; fined j£2, and costs, or, in default, seven ' days* imprisonment. 1 Assault. — Louis Ferdinand, on remand, t : was charged on information with haring, ' i on the 12th instant, maliciously and un- j j lawfully beat one Ellen Lawler. At the ' request of Sergeant -Major Hickson pri- J I toner was remanded till the 17th May. CJYIL CASKS. ! Klein v. Rees. — A claim for £89 llu. . ! for advertising. This case bad been ad- , journcd no less than three times, at the j defendant's request. On the case being called j to-day, Mr Button mn-.'e application for a ; further adjournment. He said the plaintiff had that morning agreed to take a verdict by consent for a certain portion of the claim ; but since that time he had told tun (Button) that he intended to have the case heard. The defendant was engaged in the Supreme Court, and could uot appear The plaiutiu" said ho admitted having I agreed to settlement, m seated, b«; wheft

he did so he had not been made aware that [ the defendant and Mr Button had made an i application to his Honor, that morning, in ! Chambers, to have another journal appointed as a gazette for the publication of bankruptcy advertisements. lie considered that both gentlemen had taken an unfair advantage ofhim in thematter. as he wasnot aware on what grounds they had based their application. Mr Rees alleged that he (Mr < Klein) had contracted to insert bankruptcy advertisements at 12s 6d each ; and the i whole of the advertisements now chai'ged I for by him at the usual rate did not average more than 12s 10d, or 4d more for each. There had, in fact, been no more than 15s of dispute throughout. He had con- j sented to three adjournments already, | at a great deal of inconvenience | to himself, he having to bring forward | Avitnesses on each occasion. His Worship j asked plaintiff whether he would agree to I a further adjournment till the 21st inst.. i or take the verdict as arranged that morn- j ing. The plaintiff said that if he con- , sented .to have the case adjourned, His J Honor would, most probably have left j town befoi'e the case was heard, and he, ! therefore, would not be in a position to ! rebut anything Messrs Buttou and Rees j had said to His Honor in support of the ! application. He would, therefore, con- j sent to judgment being given in the ca.se . for payment tit the rate of 12s 6d per advertisement. His Worship said he would I give judgment for the amount to-morrow J (this day). i

Whittaker v. Anderson. — A claim for i JIBB. Mr Button appeared for defendant. | This case had been remanded on the pre- ! vious day, for plaintiff" to amend bill of particulars. The plaintiff said, on examination by Mr Button, that he had bought a great many goods for defendant, and she had promised to pay for them. lie bad been asked to buy poultry for her, and did 1 so. The poultry was taken to her place, j the West Coast Hotel. He had not fed i the fowls as his own, but had given her i oats for them. Had not given her oats j for her parrot and magpie. The £24 credited in the bill had been charged to a man j who took the Provincial Hotel when sho left it. Mr Button applied for a nonsuit, on the ground that his client refused to have the credit of the £-21 4s, and therefore ; the total amount of the bill was over £100. i and out of the jurisdiction of the court. j His Worship granted a nonsuit, without cost. Rufferty v. Buckhouse. — A claim for | .£3O, money lent. Mr Button appeared . for the defendant. Plaintiff said the deI fendant had admitted borrowing £5 in 111 1 f>6B from his wife, on security of a watch. ! He took the watch away, and again borI rowed £25. By Mr Button — I might have i said in a joke that Bridget Rufferty was , not my wife ; I now say she is my wife. 1 I am not joking now. Defendant first i borrowed the money at Stafford Town, and he afterwards said he paid it, bat I did not

believe him. Asked him to borrow £60 ! from my wife and give me £30. I went to i Melbourne for some goods, and sent for her ! to the Buller. She would not come as she , was attached to this place too much. I ; asked defendant to lend me a pound nt [ Stafford Town, Avhcn she took the £U 10s | off me. J. George said he heard Buck- , house say he borrowed ,C 5 and then £2o from Mrs Rufferty, and that he had paid her back ; and also that no writing had passed ■ between them. At this stage of the case plaintiff handed to the Bench a hand-book of law in support of his case. The defendant stated, in examination by Mr Button, that he had borrowed the money and paid it back. Plaintiff said lie would give me £10 if [ would tell what bank his wife's money was in. She took this 'memorandum (produced) out of a book, and destroyed it for fear plaintiff should get hold of it.' I don't know that Mrs Rufferty burned the place down since this affair came on. Judgment for defendant ; costs of Court, £1 (Ts ; and professional costs, i! 3 3s. The Court then adjourned until to-mor-row (this) morning, at eleven o'clock.