AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume 2, Issue 177, 29 March 1878, Page 2

AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday,- March 26. (Before Justin Ayhner, Esq., R.M.) CAJCTLt' TRESPASS.... Thomas Adams and John Duxbury were each fined 5s and costs for allowing horses to wander. BREACH 0? PUBLIC-HOUSE ordinance. Thomas Adams was charged with neglecting to keep a light burning in front of his licensed house on the evening of the 19th inst. Defendant admitted the offence, but stated that it was very early in the evening. The police stated that defendant had been repeatedly cautioned. JFined 10s and costs. "' obstruction. Okain's Bay Road Board v. Thacker.— This case was further adjourned to Tuesday, 9th April. Civil Cases. Perham v. Niedler. — Claim, £3 17s. Judgment by consent for the amount claimed with costs.

Saxton and Williams v. Taylor.—Claim, £25 19s 7d. Mr Nalder appeared for plaintiffs. Defendant pleaded not indebted, and put in a set-off amounting to £24. Plaintiffs' solicitor would allow the set-off to be put in, though the necessary notice had not been given. The points in dispute were as follow : —lt appeared that defendant let some land and a number of cows to plaintiffs, and the latter contended that they had only received nineteen cows instead of twenty ; that one of these had died, and two had been sold by defendant. Plaintiffs claimed £6 for the loss of the season's milking of these two cows. Defendant, on the other hand, contended that the cattle had been sold as being unproductive, aud with the consent of the plaintiffs, he therefore disputed this item. He also claimed the value of two cows— the ono that died and the one the delivery of which was disputed. It was contended for the plaintiffs that, according to usual custom, they were not liable for loss of the cattle by death or unavoidable causes. Mr Saxton and Mr B. Malmanche, who had acted as agent for the defendant, gave evidence which went to show that only nineteen head had been delivered. Verdict for plaintiffs for £19 19s 7d with costs, including solicitor's fee. (G. H. Saxton, Esq., J.P., here took his seat on the Bench.) FORGERY AND UTTERING. John Simmons,- on remand, was charged with an offence of this nature. From the evidence, it appeared that on the 15th inst., prisoner, who was then breaking stones on the roadside, had entrusted Mr West Chamberlayne, the driver of the Christchurch coach, with a cheque for £15 to get cashed for him in Christchurch. The latter brought him the change on the following day. amongst which.was a cheque for £3, drawn by C. Aldridge, of Cobb's office, in Christchurch. On the 20th prisoner presented this cheque to Mr Olphert, of the Forsyth .Arms. Little River, and asked him to cash it for him. In the part where the figures stand, however, it had been altered to £39, the words " three pounds" in the body of tho cheque remaining unaltered. Ixi answer to questions, prisoner stated that he had received the cheque from Mr Ashton, of the Pigeon Bay Hotel, as one for £39, in part payment for one of £58, which he had earned '• grass-seeding." On Constable Lamb being sent for, prisoner first repeated the same statement, but on being taken to the lock-up, he said—'-If I tell you the truth, will you believe me ? I got the cheque from the coach-driver. I gave him a cheque for £15 on Friday to get cashed for me, and he brought me b«ok the change on Saturday from Christchurch, and gave me the £3 cheque and the rest in cash. I altered the figures on

the cheque for devilment. I had some drink before the 16th, and I suppose that was what made me do it." A curious feature in the case was that a no less sum than £124 14s 3d was found on the prisoner, besides some alluvial gold. Mr Ash.ton, of Pigeon Bay, "denied ever having seen the cheque in question before, or having cashed any cheque for the prisoner at all.

Prisoner declined to cross-examine the witnesses, but in his defence ■ made a rambling and not very intelligible statement, the gist of which appeared to be that he had committed the act of which he was accused on purpose, in order to bring before his " superior officers" what he considered a grievance of the laboring man. It was contrary to law and justice that wages should be paid in cheques. They ought to be paid in cash, as working men had to lose 8 or 10 per cent, to get cheques cashed. Prisoner was committed to take his trial at the next sitting of the Supreme Court in Christchurch. The court then adjourned.