MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 210, 24 May 1918, Page 7

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

POLICE AMD CIVIL CASES SHIPOWNERS' RESPONSIBILITY Mr. L. G. Roid, S.M., presided at.tho Magistrate's Court yesterday and dealt with tho' police cases. John Bougloy was charged that on May 22 he did use obscene language in C'ourteiiay Place. Tho defendant said ho knew nothing of the matter. Ha suffered from shell-shock, and as ho had Homo liquor that day it upset hiin. Ho was fined 205., in default seven days' imprisonment. Martin Quinn was charged that on Wednesday, in tho bar of the Pier Hotel, ho did use threatening behaviour whereby a breach of tho peace was occasioned. Sub-Inspector Emerson said that the man was guilty of a very cowardly assault. The accused and some soldiers were in tho bar of tho hotel. The soldiers were talking among themselves and not interfering with anyone, whon the accused went up and struck ono .of the soldiers a blowon tho jaw and knocked him down. When a policeman came in and interviewed tho maii tho only explanation lie gavo was, "The man had too much to say, and I gave him ono on the jaw." Tho soldier, however, declined to prosecute, and this fact was taken into consideration by tlm Magistrate, who lined Quinn X'i, in default 21 days' imprisonment. Charles Sorensen deserted from an overseas vessel in January last and went up-country, whero he. secured work, but latterly this was denied him because ho was without an alien's enrolment certificate. Ho then returned to Wellington, and on applying tor enrolment the fact of his, desertion was discovered. Jt'or deserting from his ship ho was sentenced to 14 days' imprisonment, and for failing to enrol under tho Aliens Act ho was fined 10s., in default 14 days, tho tonus to bo cumulative. For iusobriuty, William Conrick, an olderly man, against .whom there were two previous convictions, was lined 21)3.', and a prohibition order was issued against him, to be effective for 12 months. Edith Louisa Young, with two previous convictions, was lined 21)3., with the option of If days' imprisonment; Alary Sprowelf, with, ono proviuus conviction, was lined IDs., in default seven days' imprisonment, and was ordered to pay 17s. Gd. medical oxpenses, with the alternative of.seven days' imprisonment. Three first offenders who failed to appear hau their kail of 10s. each estreated. CIVIL CASES. Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M., dealt with the civii cases, and gave judgment for plaintiff in the following uiidetendcu cases:—Gordon Stuart James v. T. J. Thompson, £$ 55., costs £1 145.; Frederick James Piunv and John Mitchell v. G. 11. Oliver, £i 155., coats il Us. lid.; A. Jlatrick and Co., Ltd.,' v. 'Borneo Sommorville, .£8 lis. Id., costs M 3s. Gd.; I'ublic Trustee (as administrator of tlio cstato of Kathleen V. Allen) v. Eliott Hume, .£2l 125., costs .£2 Ids., and possession of tenement; D.I.C. v. Miss S. M. Eisner, .£5 ss. Id., costs .£1 la. Gd.; Commercial Agency, Ltd., and 11. O. Uinborn) and Co., Ltd., v. E. B. d'An vers, Jjl Is., costs 55.; John James Boyd v. John Honry Potter, M 12s. u'd., costs 12s.

RESPONSIBILITY 01' SHIPOWNER. G. H. Davies and Co., of Auckland, indent merchants, claimed from the JS'ew Zealand and African Steamship t:o., Ltd., the'sum of J;!) Os. sd. the value of 2!)J gallons of lysol. Briefly, the caso was. that a cask of lysoP weighing -lowt. tqr. 231b. gross was received by; the defondant company at Glasgow for carriage to Wellington, to the order of the plaintiff, and when the cask reached plaintiff it was found to be 29 gallons short. On examining the cask it was discovered that the leakage was due to a small hole caused by a nail or small sharp instrument. 'The bill of lading showed that the cask was received by the shipowners in good order and condition, For the defence it was contended that tho onus was on the plaintiff to provo that tho nolo was caused through the negligonce of tho defendant company. Aftor hearing evidence the Magistrate reserved his decision. Mr. 0. C. Mazeugarb appeared for tho plaintiff and Mr. A. W. Blair for tho defendant. SEPARATION ORDER. Sarah Sangster applied to have a separ. ation order made against her husband, Harry Sangster, a baker, and also for maintenance and guardianship of the children.

Mr. H. F. O'Lcary appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. J. Scott i'or the defendant. _ ' • Sarah Sangster, in her evidence, said she was married when about 17J- years old, anj had been man-ied to defendant for upwards of thirty years. There \v*rc eight children of tho marriage. She left her husband sis years ago, and had left liiin on several occasions previously. She had never received any money from her husband to purchase clothes i'or the children, and she had to go out washing to earn money. Witness gave instance's of cruelty, aud details of happenings that were of a revolting character. Tho evidence of a son-in-law and two daughters of tho parties was taken in support of tho plaintiff's case. 'iho defendant, Harry Sangster, stated that ho guvo his wife money to pay tho household accounts, but she did not do so, and he alleged ho had often to provide money to pay tho bills a second time. Ho admitted that his. correct namo was Harry Sangster-Hill. Sometimes ho went by tho name of Sangster, sometimes by that of Hill, -uid when he was travelling with a Miss Ashcr ho took her name.

Several witnesses were called to provw that tho young children while in the custody or the father wore well looked after, "and were kept rleau mid tidy. The Magistrate made an order lor separation, but declined to nniko any order as to the gi'nrdianship of the children, and said if an application came Fiefore him in 'mother form he would consider sending the children to a home.