RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1469, 20 February 1885, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

SOUTH BAKAlA— Yesterday.

(Before H. C. S. Baddeley, Esq., R.M.) CIVIL ■ A3ES. Hartnell v J. Irvine, claim L 9 4a sd, for goods supplied.—Judgment for the amount claimed and costs, the defendant to pay LI per month. Same v H. McLean, claim Ll 7 6a 2d for goods supplied—Judgment for the amount claimed and costs.

Same v P. Larraman, claim Ll 3 lls lOd —Judgment for the amount claimed and costs.

Primmer v 0. Inder, claim Ll 4 for the loss of sex in a pig and the loss of his services.—Mr John Holmes appeared for plaintiff. Henry Primmer said that he was owner of a bojr pig in January last. On December 31st he went to Ashburton, and left the pig safe. When he returned on January 2nd the pig was missing; he found it at Howell’s Hotel all right, but did not take it away. He next saw the pig on the 4th January when he went to defendant’s place and found the pig

his pen. On the 6th it had been rated ; he said nothing to defendant. The next day he met defendant in the township, and asked him what he intended doing about the pig. Defendant denied that the pig belonged to witness, but ultimately loid witness to take it away and another would be supplied to replace is. The pig was freshly, operated upon. It was taken to Hoodie’s, and had remained there since. The value of the boar as an entire was L 5. It was to have served twenty sows, and plaintiff was to have a pig for each service at eight weeks old. The pig was now only worth LI.—To the defendant: He never had more than one boar at a time. Had been too busy to take the pig away when first he saw him. Was not willing to take LI in settlement now.—William Street gave evidence as to the defendant having operated upon the pig. Witness thought the pig was about twelve months old. — Henry Rutter said that about six months ago he had sold plaintiff the boar, subject of the present action, for 22s 6d. As a boar pig it would be worth about L 4. Jamas Santy gave evidence to the effect that he had heard the defendant say that he intended to operate upon the pig.— Walter Hartnell said that boar pigs fairly well bred were worth from L 5 to LlO He would give only about 15a for one afterit had been operated upon.—Edward Telford also gave evidence to the effect that Inder had taken the pig away.— G. Inder, the defendant, said that he knew nothing about the plaintiff’s pig. He had one of his own running about, and it was his own boar he had operated upon.—lsaac Hoodie thought the pig was from 18 to 20 months’ old, and would weigh about 112 lbs. Was a good judge of pigs. This one was not a full-bred Berkshire. Would not have given more than 35a for it. He would rather give that amount for him |after than before he was operated upon. He was certain the pig now at his place was , the plaintiff’s property —Judgment was given for plaintiff for Lll, and costs L 4 2i.

ASHBUR fON— I’o-day.

(Before H. 0. S. Baddeley, Esq , R.M.) Dkunkennbss. —John Smith was charged with having been drunk and disorderly at Rakaia. Oona able Bourke deposed that he had arrested the accused at the Rakaia railway station last evening. The accused was fined 20s and costa, with the alternative of three days' impris-

sonment. Martin Moran was charged with having been drunk at the Courthouse yesterday. The accused admitted the offence, and was fined 20s and costs, with the alternative of four days’ imprisonment.—A. first offender, a recent inmate of the Old Men’s fclome, aged 73 years, charged with having been drunk in the Somerset Hotel, was discharged with a caution.—Elizabeth Wigg, a married woman, was charged with having been

drunk and disorderly in Burnett street yesterday, and with having damaged certain property at the police station. The husband ot the accused said that his wife was addicted to drink, and to give her an opportunity to reform he had determined to remove from Christchurch to Timaru, They were now on their way to the latter place with two children, horses and a draj. Having been delayed at the Aah-

borton bridge his wife took the opportunity to obtain drink, had become intoxicated, and as a result was arrested. He asked'the Bench to consider the painful portion in which he Jwas placed.—Sergeant Felton described the conduct of the accused at the police station.—The accused for drunkenness was fined 20s and

costs, with the alternative of 48 hours' imprisonment, and ordered to pay 12 1 61 value of property destroyed, or to be imprisoned for five days. Vapranct, —Bobert Kent, James Edminaton, alias Morris, alias Smith, and Margaret Maloney, alias Hartnell, alias Kent, were charged with being rogues and

vagabonds,-.having no visible lawful means of support, and having previously been convicted as vagrants. —Constable Smart said that early on Wednesday morning he had seen the accused, Edminston, at the back of the Somerset Hotel and at the Arcade in the company of a woman named Ellen Danby, who since had been convicted for vagrancy. The witness gaya

some particulars of their proceedings.— Constable Neill gave similar evidence in reference to Kent and the female accused. —Constable Lewis, stationed at Christ-

church, said that he knew Kent and the female prisoner. The former lived on the proceeds of the latter’s prostitution.— Sergeant Felton gave particulars of previous convictions against the accused.— James Edminston was ordered tc be imprisoned for six months, and Robert Kent and Margaret Maloney for twelve months. CIVIL CASES.

McPherson, Philmer and Co. v Watts, claim Ll 9 19a lOd.—Mr Caygill for the plaintiff. Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs. A, Orr v Watts, claim L 7 18s 6d—Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs. Tapper v Watts, claim LlB lls 6d.—

Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs. Ashburton Cheese and Butter Factory Company v Wakeham, claim L 4 10s lOd for unpaid calls upon shares and interest. Mr Purnell for the plaintiffs.—Judgment for the amount claimed and costs.

Purnell v Munroe, claim L2 lls 6d.— Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs, Mitchell and Turner v Hayman, claim L4l7a lid. Mr Caygill for the plaintiff. —Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs. Same v W. Horsfall, claim L2 18 s 7d. Mr Caygill for plaintiff.—Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costa.

Marsh v Munroe, claim L 9 10s.—Judgment by default for the amount claimed and coats. Mitchell and Turnery J. Padget, claim L2 18s lid. Mr Caygill for the plaintiffs, Mr Crisp for the defendant. —Mr Crisp took a preliminery objection to ;the summons. Qe contended that the plaintiffs were not properly described, and asked that the .case might be struck out. The application was granted. Mitchell and Turner v Pergusson, claim L 7. Mr Caygill for the plaintiffs, Mr Branson for the defendant. —Mr Branson raised a similar objection to that submitted by Mr Crisp, in the proceeding case with the same result. j