MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 23, 22 October 1920, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

POLICE AND CIVIL CASES

Mr. J. S. Evans, 8.M., dealt with the police cases at the Magistrate's Court ycßterday. ■

Harold Edward Doyle, a fireman, was charged with'-ÜBtng thrcat.cniui; behaviour in .Manners Street, also with obstructing Constable 11. Sarpcnt. ■ Bernard Haran, fireman, was similarly charged, and Thornaß .Dryhurst,. nlso a fireman, wias charged with obstructing Constablo Sargent. According to the evidence Doyle and Haran Jind their coats off, and were engaged in a''fight'on Wednesday afternoon. Constable Sargent arrived on thn scene, and when ho tried to arrcßt. the men they resisted violently. Dryhurst came up, and also prevented the constablo doing his duty. Doyle and Haran were both intoxicated, andttheirr r dispute in the street caused about 400 or SCO people to congregate, and the. trams were held ud. It ivaß not until two other constables arrived that the men were secured; Tho three men were convicted. Doyle was fined 10s. for drunkenness. 2te. for fighting in Manners Strset, and was sentenced to 14 days' imprisonment for resisting tho constable, ilaran waj fined £1 on each of the three charges, and Dryhurst was sent to prison for 14 days, for resisting the consrablo.

Robert Deveroaux, a wharf labourer, was charged with the theft of 441b. of coal (value Zs.), the property of the Union S.S. Company. It waß stated that at 9.40 p.m. on Wednesday the accused was seen by an official of tlis Union Company coming off the Railway Wharf with a sugar bag full of coal. He was stopped and questioned He denied taking th 3 coal off the wharf. He said he got the coal off the line adjoining tho whnrf and from tho roadway, and he did not think he wafi stealing by doing so, Tho Magistrate gave accused the benefit of the doubt, and dismissed the Information,

James Holder, a watersider, was charged with the theft of an overcoat (value £0). the property of some porson unknown. On the apulication of Chief Detective' Ward a remand to October 29 was granted. Roy Gordon Whittington and Donald Munday Whittington were charged with the theft of a tarpaulin (value £6), the property of Andrew Anderson. The cases wero adjourned until this morning. CIVILBuiNESS Judgment was given for plaintiff, in Ihe following undeiended civil cases:—lnternational Importing Co. v. J. Richardson, £25 Is. 6d., ccsts £2 18s. j "N.Z. Times" Co.. Ltd., V. M. Burnett, 7s. 6d., costß Bs.; samo v. E. C. fitubbs and Co., £14 sb„ . costs £2 145.; M'Arthur, .Milliken Structural Co. (in liquidation) v. Anthony Bonner, £50, costa £4 Is. 6d.s Commercial Agency and h. T. Watkinß, Ltd., v. Roberta Iron,' Steel, and Oven Works, Ltd., £36 ss. 6d., costs £4 Is. 6d.; H. 8. Partridge and Co. (N.Z.), Ltd', v. J.'Thomas, £26 14b. Ed., cOßta £3 65.; Teagle, Smith and Sons, Ltd., v. A. S. Rogers, £4 Ib. fld.. costs' £1 3s. 6(1. ' LOSS OF WOOL IN TRANSIT. Ellen Jane Stewart,, widow, formerly ol Apitl, but now'of Levin, proceeded against tho Railway Department to recover £132 15s„ in rcspect of five bales of wool delivered to the railway at Feilding, and consigned to the Bunk of New Zealand at Wellington. The wool was alleged to have been lost in transit. Mr. H, r von Haast appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. l'reiideville (o£ the Crown Law Office) appeared for the Department. It waa stated that the wool was trucked at Feila ing on January 8, 1919, and the next day was brought on to I'almerpton North. Owing to heavy congestion the wool wua detained in Palmerston until tho morning of January 14, when the truck was brought on to Wellington, and was delivered into the Harbour Boat dashed on January lt>. The evidence for the plaintiff was taken in Feildlng, and Mr. l'rciideville, in opening his caße, sLuteu thai he would raise two nonsuit points. One was that the plaint vras not filed within twelve months, and the other vras t-hat tho plaintiff did not comply with the Railway Regulations as gazetted. Several witnesses vere examined, and the case was adjourned sine die. When thfc case is nsumcd legal argument will be heard on tllfs question o£ liability.