RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wanganui Herald, Volume IV, Issue 1238, 29 September 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Friday, Sept. 29, 1871. (Before Major Edwards, R. M., and Major Dime, Esq., J. P.) DRUNKENNESS. John Brookson forfeited his bail of 20s. ASSAULT. George Mclntyre was charged with having assaulted Jane Clinio on the 28th hist. The complainant stated that the accused assaulted her by coming into her bed-room and awakening her, by placing his hand upon her. She screamed out and awakened her husband who was in bed Avith her; he got up and held the prisoner until the police was sent for. The accused stated that he was rather the Avorse for liquor, and on entering the house by the back with the desire of obtaining a bed, having slept there the night previous, he mistook the room; he had no intention of assaulting the complainant. Another charge of being unlawfully on thepremises of James Climo, Avas preferred against the accused ; he admitted the charge, but made the same defence as in the previous case. The R. M. stated that he believed no criminal assault was intended, but warned the accused that drunkenness was no palliation of the offence. Fined 403 or in default 15 days imprisonment.

TOAVN BOARD CASES

Mr Roberts made an application to the Bench to adjourn all the cases in which the Town Board Avas concerned. The Attorney-G?.neral having ruled that the whole of the Provincial Acts under which the Town Board was constituted, Avere ultra vires, placed the Board in an awkward position, even supposing a judgment Avas obtained it-would be inoperative. Mr Duncan as counsel for one of the parties summonsed applied for a non-suit as his defence. Avas not based upon the legality of the Board.

The R. M. stated that the opinion lately expressed by the. Attorney-General entirely prevented the" Board from sristaining_auy action, but as he was aware that a Validation Act was in course of preparation for the Assembly and it being probable it would be retrospective in its working, he thought it would be better to adjourn all the cases for one month. UNLAWFUL EJECTMENT. George Lynch, Robert Stewart, and John Mooney, were charged on the information of George McCaiil, with having unlawfully ejected him from a certain tenement in St Hill Street.

Mr Duncan appeared for the informant and Mr Cooper (instructed by Mr Roberts) for the defendants.

Before the case was gone into Mr Cooper rose and applied to have the information quashed, on the ground that it had been improperly brought. The remedies provided by law for a case of this kind were three fold. Ist. by an action for damages 2nd. by the summary jurisdiction of the Justices of the Peace, and 3rd. by an action in the Supreme Court for a writ of ejectment. The old statute of 21st James Ist Chap. 3, under which this information had been laid, was obselete. The learned counsel ably supported the argument by authorities.

Mr Duncan contended that the action was brought with a view to punish the offenders for committing a breach of the law. No ease could go before the Supreme Court in its criminal jurisdiction, unless it had been first inquired into by Justices of the Peace in their ministerial"1 capacity. With respect to the objection raised'by Mr Cooper that the old statute law was' abselete, he (Mr Duncan) contended that it only applied as far as action on view -went, as referred to by Mr Justice Johnston in Hs handbook, who does not throw any doubt on an action by way of information. If this information was" quashed it would be a great injustice to the informant, as it would be practically useless to bring an action for damages, seeing- that the defendants were persons of no standing. After a lenghy discussion between the counsel, the R. M. ruled that although he regretted the state of the law, yet the only course open was to quash the information. Mr Cooper applied for costs. The 11. M. allowed £2 2s professional fee. Mr Duncan stated that he would apply for a mandamus, to which Mr Cooper replied that he would oppose the application. George McOaul v. Hoani Maku. Claim £16 Ss.

Mr Roberts in this case applied for costs, as the plaintiff had withdrawn the action without notice having been given. Professional fee of~£i Is allowed.