RESIDENT MAGISTRATE S COURT.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 2, Issue 349, 20 May 1881, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE S COURT.

ASHBURTON.— To-Day. (Before Mr N. Wood, R.M.) Insulting Language. —The charge of this nature against Henry Little, by Harry B. Chichester, which was adjourned from last Court day, to enable defendant to call witnesses, was resumed. —Mr Branson appeared for the defence. Several .v’tnesses were called for the purpose of proving that the language complained of was made use of in the hotel, and not in a public thoroughfare as alleged.—After hearing evidence of same, his Worship inflicted a tine of 10s, and 19s costs. Brutal Assault. Harry Burnett Chichester was charged with brutally assaulting a pupil under his charge, at the Hinds school, of which he is the master. —Mr O’Reilly appeared for the complainant, and Mr Branson for the defence.— The evidence showed thatthe complainant, a pupil at the public school, Hinds, some days since, complained to his father, who is Chairman of the School Committee, that the defendant was keeping him in a lower standard than he considered himself entitled to be in. His father wrote a note to Chichester, drawing his attention to this, and gave it to the boy to deliver. When he received it, knowing the lad’s complaint to be utterly false, defendant gave him a few strokes with a cane, and admonished him on the evils of telling falsehoods. The hoy considering himself hardly used, again complained to his parents, the outcome being the present action. The castigation was proved to be but a light one.—His Worship held that the lad deserved the thrashing for telling a falsehood, and dismissed the case with costs.

A Neighbors’ Quarrel. —Mary Ann Cane was charged with using abusive language to Mary Ami Boswell. —The evidence showed the case to be one of the ordinary character of bickerings, and his Worship fined defendant ss, and costs 6s.

Illegally on the Premises. —W. H. Dobson and W. Lawrie were charged with being illegally on the premises of J. Brimmicombe, Rakaia.—The offence it was shown, was committed during a drunken spree, and his Worship dismissed the defendants, conditionally on their paying the costs of a witness in the case. CIVIL CASES.

Lancaster v. Bushett —Claim, L 3 2s 4d.—Judgment for plaintiff for L2 5s Id and costs 7s. Stevens v. Wilson —Claim, Ls.—Mr Branson for the plaintiff, and Mr O’Reilly for the defence. —Mr Branson applied for an adjournment.—Mr O’Reilly objected to this, on the ground that only 4s were due by his client on the claim, and that it would be very unfair to ask him to come a distance of 12 miles to answer such a paltry claim. He asked his Worship to strike out the case.—His Worship suggested the costs of the adjournment should bo paid by the plaintiff.—Mr Branson asked that they might be made attendant on the result of the case. Four shillings had been paid into Court by the defendant, but no coats had been settled ; therefore the defendant was not entitled

thereto.—His Worship entered the case as one of non-appearance of the plaintiff, leaving it to Mr Branson to institute fresh proceedings, should he deem it advisable. —The application for costs was disallowed. The Court then rose.