RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Cromwell Argus, Volume III, Issue 151, 1 October 1872, Page 6

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday, September 26.

(Before E. H. Careio, Esq., R.M.; and J. B. Lake, Esq., J.P.)

RAFFLING A HOUSE. William Smith, lately residing at Welshtown, Bendigo, was charged, on the information of Sergeant Cassels, with an infraction of section 13 of the Town and Country Police Ordinance 1862, —the defendant having (as the information alleged) been unlawfully- interested in a certain lottery stated to have taken place at the Solway Hotel, Bendigo, on the 14th September. This case was brought into Court in order to test the legality of disposing of real property by so-called " Estate Companies." Sergeant Cassels prosecuted ; and Mr F. J. Wilson appeared as counsel for defendant. A plea of "Hot guilty" having been put in by defendant's solicitor, the prosecutor proceeded to call evidence in support of the charge. William Goodall, publican, of Bendigo, was sworn ; but objected to give evidence which might tend to involve himself in a similar charge to that preferred against the defendant Smith. The Bench sustained the objection, and the witness was discharged. Sergeant Cassels, sworn : On the 20th Sept. I served the defendant with a summons on the charge now preferre I against him. When serving the summons, defendant said to me, " Do yon intend to press the charge ? I admit the offence, and Stanbrook was the cause of it." He told me Stanbrook had led him to believe the lottery would be quite lawful, and he (defendant) was quite willing to pay any fine that might be inflicted. 1 remarked to Smith that I had informed Stanbrook if the lottery did c >me off I would take cognisance of the matter and bring it before the Court. Thomas Downey, miner, [who gave his evidence apparently with much reluctance], sworn, stated : I was present at a lottery held at the Solway Hotel on the 14th September. I acted as drawer, j as I was not personally interested in the result. There were two boxes. 1 drew from the box which contained the blanks and the prize-ticket. The tickets in the other box had the numbers and names written upon them. Goodall was declared the winner of the prize. Stanbrook was present, and took an active part in the proceedings. I think the prize was an iron house situate at Welshtown, Bendigo. Goodall was not present. I do not know who got up the lottery, and cannot say who asked me to draw the tickets. Sergeant Cassels : The house was Smith's, and he had been living in it ever since it was built. In answer to the Bench, the Sergeant stated that Stanbrook had been summoned as a witness, but not subpcenaed. Mr Wilson briefly addressed the Court in defence, contending that no evidence had been brought to establish the charge made against his client. The Court considered the case proved, and fined the defendant 40s ; together with 14s costs of Court, and 23s expenses for one witness (Downey). The witness Goodall—to save himself from possible prosecution—having given no evidence, would be alloned no expenses. JOHN CLODE V. DANIEL MOORE. An adjourned case, in which the plaintiff claimed £3 for money lent. The defendant did not appear. Judgment given for the amount claimed, together with 9s costs. [Dr Lake here left the Bench. ] H. W. SMYTHIES V. D. MOORE. Claim, £7, upon a dishonoured promissory note. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for amount claimed, with 10s costs. [Mr Loughnan, J. P., took a seat on the Bench. ] R. HOR ROBIN V. R. E. DAGO. A claim of £2B 10s, balance of wages alleged to be due to plaintiff as groom and general assistant. Mr Allanby for plaintiff. The defendant admitted indebtedness to the extent of £l3, and disputed the balance. Evidence having been heard on both sides, the Bench suggested that the parties should endeavour to effect a compromise in regard to the amount in dispute (£ls 10s). The Court then adjourned for half an hour. At its re-opening, Mr Allanby stated

that the parties had agreed to split the different! and to divide the costs. Judgment was tW given, by consent, for £2O 155," with costs of Court, a£d' 21s solicitor's fee; [Mr Loughnan left the' Bench:] HOWELLJ Lo'rjQHNAK, AND COCKS V. W. BA'TEMiJ Claim, £5 7s 2d, for mutftoii, &c, Mr'F.'J. Wilson for plaintiffs,.. mitted the debt, with the exception of £1 Osju claimed for goods alleged to have been obtained about five years since. Mr I. Loughnan pm, duced account-books to prove that the item dij, puted was correctly charged in the account ren, dered, but that the plaintiffs' former manage had omitted to extend the figures into tk money-columns of the ledger. The defendant wished to put in a contra for ferriage, but ty Bench declined to entertain it, no previous % tice having been given, and the plaintiffs refjj, ing to recognise the set-off. The Resident Jlj.j gistrate said it was quite competent for any <J to recover an amount accidentally omitted froJ previous accounts. Judgmentforamountclaimeiy with 13s costs of Court, and 21s solicitor's fee,] HOWELL, LOUGHNAN, AND COCKS V. T. SIAKSH, Claim, £6. Defendant put in a set-off of ja 15s, and paid 5s into Court. Plaintiffs M whom Mr Wilson appeared) disputed severi items in the contra, and defendant failed tj prove their correctness. Judgment for £3 10s i] addition to the amount paid in ; together wita 17s costs of Court, and 21s solicitor's fee.