Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT CLYDE.

Thursday, February 29. (Before AY. L. Simpson, Ks.;., R.M., and B. Jiayior, Esq. ,J P | Police v. Stanhrovk.—-Judgment was given'in -this ease as follows This case came on for judgment, when the Bench said it was a case brought against a person said to be a Licensed Auctioneer. for selling chances in what, are known as Calcutta Sweeps a(:or the hours permitted by the Ordinance, The Bench after remarking on the loose way the case had been conducted for the prosecution said that, so loose had it been that the omission to prove that Stanbrook was a Licensed Auctioneer must bo fatal to the ease, but the 8.-nch were of opinion the prosecution must fail on the merits. An Auction, which was of Roman origin, looking at its history and derivation, in the opinion of the Bench must lie public, and that in terms of the Ordinance under winch the License' is issued it must be so, while the so called sale cf the information, was non, being confined to subscribers. But what is it that is said to have been sold at this Auction, “ A chance, ” but none of the terms used in the interpretation clause of the Ordinance will embrace such a word. In fact it represents nothing tha law can recognise or enforce. But farther, what is a Calcutta Sweep, nothing, in the opinion of the Beach, but a “ Lottery, and therefore illegal 06 initio. Ex nihil nihil. The Bench therefore cannot lend . itself to an illegality, and must dismiss the information

M'tonnan v. Manning. Claim 30/., the value of a dishonorsl cheque —Evidence in this case was taken under the Resident Magistrate’s Court Evidence Act, the summons being taken out for Dunedin.

Malcolm M.Lennan sworn, deposed that in October, 1572, he sold the defendant six sharoi in the P.iounutin Coll Minmg Company for which he received a cheque post dated. These ishares were sold by me as Manager of the Company for the Company 1 hold the cheque till March 1, 1873, when the Company being short of funds I advanced 321-, keeping the cheque in part payment. I swear this is the transaction, as the Company were credited with the amount. I was the only Manager of the Company. About the time the cheque became dm I paid it into th • Bank of New Zealand, M.anhucrikia for collection on my own account; it was dishonored. I have seen Manning since, but cannot s.ay what was said about the

ell 'qua. Under tlie R.M. Court Evidence Ac 4 ', INTr. F. J. Wilson applied that evidence be taken at Alexandra on Monday the Kith Febuiary in a suit to be beard at the Taiari. Application granted. "WARDEN'S COURT. Mr. I). Scally applied for extension of bead water-race. Granted.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DUNST18740130.2.5

Bibliographic details

Dunstan Times, Issue 615, 30 January 1874, Page 2

Word Count
465

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT CLYDE. Dunstan Times, Issue 615, 30 January 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT CLYDE. Dunstan Times, Issue 615, 30 January 1874, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert