AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume V, Issue 518, 1 July 1881, Page 2

AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday, June 28.

(Before G. 11. Saxton and W. B. Tosswill, Esqs., J.lVs.) H EC. I STRATI ON ACT. Robert Wright was, on the information of tho Registrar, J. Aylmer, Esq.. charged with neglecting to register his child before the age of six months. The accused pleaded guilty. The Registrar said he did not wish to press for a heavy penalty, as the person who had been entrusted to. register the child had failed to do so, and had gone to England, but the Bench must impose a fine, otherwise tho registration could not take place. The Bench pointed out that persons neglecting the important duty of registration subjected themselves to a penalty of £10. In this case the accused would be fined 5s and costs. George Ilnslar was also charged with a similar offence, and also pleaded guilty. The Registrar said this was an offence like tho last—trusting to other people to do what was the parents' plain duty. Fined 5s and costs. Mr Aylmer hero took his seat on the bench as Resident Magistrate. CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. Henry Drury was charged, under the Crue.ty to Animals Avt, with riding a horse with a bad sore ou its back on the 28th Miiy last, Constable Scott gave evidence as to the horse in question being ridden with a largo ulcerated sore on its back, which he described as being as large as would hold an egg. He also examined tho saddle, which was covered with blood and matter. Mr J. Sunokell, jun., also gave evidence as to the horse being ridden on the date named. Sergl. Willis stated the horse's back was ene of the worst he had ever seen, and gave corroborative evidence in support of Gonstab'e Scott's evidence. This accused state;! that tlie hoco on the l.mt.:k vwis she result "i a boil which luii.t hroko:i, aiill the horse 'uiv , : novel uucii j i'iddcu i-:;i.i'jo. lit; hud uuly riddon it in ! .from .Mi , Lelievro's sUiliou io cou*!iii Mr • Chamii-rvlriit! as U, ii>. uondtlion, and ho oallc'f! .Mr <~'!sß!!iber!;ii!i, who otatel the now, was the iv.sul( oui boil wiik-h lud burst ; iiiidet iiiu troiitment of bathitig vrith hot ! water, which ho had piusci'ibinh The horse, ! lie wa.s i-are, v.*. , ,:-; never ridden aL't>:r. On I being clos.ely ;iro:-Ncu by (lie pulii this '

witness admitted he did not remember dates, and that he did not see the horde all day, and it might have been ri'lden without his knowledge. The Bench commented strongly upon the common practice of riding horses with sore back«, and said they were determined to put a stop to it. Sergt. Willis asked the Bench to point out the fact that persons riding horses with wounds were liable to be pulled off the animal and forthwith locked up. Tho Bench warned the accused to be more careful in future, and fined him 10s and costs. BURGLARY. George Augustus Schmidt wa<* charged with burglariously entering the Riccarton Hotel, and stealing a double-barrelled breech-loading gun and 50 cartridges. The police produced the gun and cartridges, and asked for a remand to Christchuich, as all the witnesses were resident there. Remanded to Christehurch, to be brought up on Friday next. MARRIED WOMAN'S PROTECTION ACT. Mr Henning applied under this Act for an order protecting the property and earnings of Caroline Wood. A declaration by the purser of the s.s. Wakatipu was filed ill Court, stating that her husband, James Morris Wood, had been a passenger by that steamer to Sydney on 20th April last. Order mado ac requested. CIVIL CASES. Porter v. Anninjr. A claim for £20, use and occupation of premises. This case had been held over since last Court day. Judgment was now given for the amount paid into Court, £2 11s Bd, being the amount for use and occupation to 31et December last. In giving judgment the Resident Magistrate said he was guided by the fact that the plaintiff took defendant's notice to quit possession in silence which seemed to amount to a consent, and also that certain conditions in the verbal bargain between tiie parties as to fencing had not been carried out by the plaintiff. The judgment would therefore be for £2 11s 8d and costs.