RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 1981, 10 September 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

This Day. (Before A. 0. Strode, Escp, R. M.) STONE THROWINN. J. Meyer and M. Neismith were charged by Constable Keligher with breaking a signal lantern in York Place or Stafford street, value Is. His Worship, after hearing the evidence, said the offence charged against the defendants arose from the blackguard system of throwing stones, so prevalent among the youths and boys of the City. It was impossible to believe that the defendants did not see the lantern. Stone throwing placed both foot-passengers and persons on horse-hack in danger, and he was determined to put the practice down. He had no doubt tiie affair had been a lark, and he should impose such a tine as would make it an expensive one. He ordered them to pay for the damage done to the lantern, Is, and a Hue of 20s each, with costs. The amount was immediately paid. DRUNKENNESS. W. Watson, on hail, charged with being drunk and disorderly, was fined JOs. Civil Cases. A. and T. Inglis v. Macgregor. —A claim for L 3 3s Cd, for goods sold and Mr Wilson for the plaintiff. There being no defence, judgment was given for the plaintiff for the amount by default. J, L. and 0. Bu'ke v. Dopelly.—Mr Wilson for the plaintiff. This suit was to recover L 9, for two hogsheads of ale sold to the defendant, who did not appear. Judgment for the plaintiff by default for the amount claimed. George Murdoch v. Rawlins and Mathieson. —A claim for one week’s wages, L2 Bs. Mr Wilson for the defence. Evidence was given to show that the plaintiff was discharged for drunkenness and neglect of duty, and that he was not paid by the week but by the day. Judgment for the defendants. Carr v. Nunn. —A claim for Ll7 3s, balance of wages. The defendant paid LlO into court. The plaintiff based his suit on the ground that Ll3 17s was due for arrears of wages, and L 3 Gs for one week’s wages in lieu of notice. The defendant stated that the terms of were lls a day. That a balance was agreed to on the 23rd June, and that the amount owing ivas 140

only. He pro lace I an account which he brought forward by Mr Calder, to the could not very clearly explain. The case was e ff ect that all the members should bind adjourned for the production of the do: cu- fc | ie , use i ves to prosecute the Superin- • 1 nut’s hooks On hem" heard at one o clock, 1 ~ -.i i • . , 3 IK ’ olv - “ \ ,-r ~ i nintiff for the tendent, or anyone acting with him, uulgmcnt was given for the piamtm lor . .? . , . amount paid into Court. for any breach of the Audit Act which he or they might commit, was passed unanimously.