RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3429, 17 February 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tuesday, February 17. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) Drunkenness. —Pati ick Boyd, who conducted himself in. a very disorderly manner while in Court, and wound up by 'informing his Worship that “he could take hia affidavit that he was not drunk when arrested ” was lined 20s ; in default, three days’ imprisonment. K Notorious Character.— Anne Cherry, a most disorderly woman, who for some years past has been in the habit of making periodical appearances in the dock, was now charged with habitual drunkenness,—f risoner pleaded guilty, but asked to be allowed to make an explanation in extenuation of her conduct, fcbe said she had taken out a passage for Lyttelton, and was proceeding to go away when arrested.—His Worship : It wool l bo a very good thing for Otago if you were cleared out.—Prisoner continued to say that she had not tasted drink till yesterday for a considerable time, and as soon as she took it she was locked up. If she were given this chance, she promised to go away at once. -His Worship thought she had got many chances. She was undoubtedly a placue to the place, and would be sentenced to three months’ imprisonment, with hard labor.

Ship Desertion.— Charles Eason, on remand, was charged with deserting from the ship Warwick.—Capt. Skinner produced the articles of the ship. Prisoner was an able seaman. He left on Friday without permission, and took his clothes with him. He wished him to be detained till the ship sailed, as be bad reason to believe that prisoner would desert again.—The prisoner promised that if taken on board, he would not eo away again.—The captain, in answer to his Worship, said he would not be ready for sea for about ten weeks. He wished prisoner to he detained in the meantime. His Worship pointed out that in accordance with the Act prisoner could not bo detained for longer than twelve weeks. He had no other alternative than to send him to Gaol for ten weeks. Polluting the Water of L*ith.— Chas. Rendril was charged, on the information of James Wilson, with polluting the stream of the Water of Leith.—Mr Harris for informant, Mr Stewart for defendant.—Mr Harris, in stating the case, mentioned that Mr Wilson, who owned an extensive brewery, used the water from the Leith for brewing’ purposes, but latterly the water bad beenabused to such au extent by defendant, arid' others that his client had been compelled to bring the case before the Court. , c Some time age a similar case was brought % Mr Wilson and Messrs M arshatawß Copeland, when a Air touness Was .fined for the offence, which afterwards had the effect of causing him to desist from abusing the stream, - James ilson, informant, owned a brewery near ths Water of Leith. Ever since the brewery had been built, some ten or twelve years ago, the Leith had been the only source from which he obtained water for his brewing purposes. He owned land on both sides of toe stream. About a month ago he found the water became very dirty, and on making inquiries ho found that there was a telimongery at work some distance up the stream, ■■ n the 29th ult. he examined the fellmongery, and found a sort of dam erected with logs on a smajktributary ol thte. stream. These logs were banked up by a number of I

sheepskins, and the water was running through and over them, There was a box just above the skins where the wool was steeped. Iho water at this place presented a milky appearance, and all about the neighbourhood, on the banks and in an old watercourse, there were accumulations of hoofs, trotters, &c. The water from this tributary runs into the stream from which be derived his supply of water. The Water of Leith must l-e polluted by means of these pursuits. By Mr Stewart: Does your refuse water run into the I eith ? Witness refused to answer that question, but afterwards said he was willing to stand the consequences of anyone lowi r down proceeding against him for polluting the stream. Anyone was at liberty to examine his premises. He believed pigs had, t een kept in the neighbourhood for some time. They had the Waterworks Company’s water laid on to their premises, and latterly, at a great expense, had been compelled to use it.—John Marshall, seniormember of the (inn of Marshall and Copeland, had been in the habit for years past of using the water from the Leith for brewing. Had been obliged for the last two or three months to discontinue using it, owing to the filthiness of the water. The air was polluted, and smelt like an old graveyard j tills was caused by the sheepskins being in the water. -Inspector Mmon on the 29th ultimo went down to Mr Ben dell’s place at the Water of Leith Valley. He was accompanied by Mr Marshall and Mr Wilson. Within about twenty yards of the house, where defendant was working, he found a quantity of sheep’s trotters. The washing process which was going on at this place would have the effect of polluting the stream. Defendant said he owned the sheep-washing place.—-Mr Stewart raised two objections. The 14th section of the Ordinance under which the information w»s laid, said any person damaging or polluting any “acqueduct. dam, sluice, pipe, pump, water-course, or fountain, ' should be liable tea fine. Hesubraitted that a water-course was not an artificial channel, and that the Ordinance did not apply to a natural channel. He admitted that persons had been fined under the section, but he did not thiuk the objection had ever been taken here before. rils Worship had no doubt as to the hardship of the case. The sootier the legislation was altered, the better for the public. He had very little doubt that the word water-course was meant for such cases as flumiog. When the urdinanoe was passed the goldfields were at their height, and that was the reason the word watcr-cmrse was used to apply to fluming. The whole of the words, except watercourse, applied to were artificial. The case would be dismissed, but with, ut costs.