RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3523, 8 June 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Monday, June 8. (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.) Drunkenness.—Mary Fraser was discharged with a caution ; William Bailey Robert Lock, Malcolm Thomison, John* Mathieson, Robert Every, and James Ander son alms Dallas, were each fined ss, with the option of forty-eight hears' imprisonment; William Lloyd 2Us, or forty-eight hours John Jay 20s, or three days. Anne M'JNamara denied a charge of drunkenness on the previous day.—His Worship : What is the history of tais woman ?—Sub-Inspector Mallard r bhe is a passenger by the Asia —(Loud aughter.)-flis Worship Ba id he always looked with some leniency upon women who appeared m court for the fir*t time. He did not think prisoner was sensible of her position, as this wasjher second offence within a very short time. Such conduct was altogether without excuse, and he could only look upon women who oanie here twice in a couple of months as abandoned characters Prisoner was fined 40s, or in default three, days imprisonment. Wife Desertion. - Edward Beasley charged on warrent with deserting his wife Martha, was, on the application of the police' remanded to Oamaru. ' Court Procedure. —Before proceeding with the business of the Court, his Worship said he desired to make an application to the egal gentlemen. He found that they bad been sitting of late-he could hardly say occasionally, for they had always, without exception, been sitting till very late hours—till live and six o'clock, and even in some cases as late as seven. Now if it had been quarterly sessions or any special Court, he would not have said anything about it. In justice «o himself and the owner officers of the Court he was bound to lay down a rule as regarded the hours of sitting, so that the solicitors would not be taken unawares, Unless in very special cases, he would not sit after feur p.m. ue had also been prevented from spending that time in his chambers which was necessary for the transaction of public business. He suggested to the pro tessionthat country cases-especially those m which there was a large number of wit-nesses-might be called on first on stated clays bycsnsulting with the clerk.—Mr Stewart asked what would be done with cases unfinished at four o'clock. Would they be concluded or adjourned ? - His Worship said it would depend on the number of witnesses to be examined. He would be prepared on Wednesday to gl ve judgment in the cases of Oat red v. Begg, and Tapskey v. Steadman. —Mr Harris observed that the rule as to the hour of sitting was a very good one: but before effect could be given to it, it would be necessary to get the police cases decided before another Court and another manssrate, otherwise there would always be a large number of cases in arrears. l ill that was done, it would be impossible for the business to be properly carried on—His Worship said he quite concurred with the remarks made by Mr Harris. To carry on the business with justice to all parties concerned, something should be done in the way indicated. J CIVIL CASES. Grennan v. O'Brien—Claim of L 6, balance of account for a horse sold. Judgment bv default for plaintiff, with costs. Wilson v. Lazarus. -Claim 30s, for house rent. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs. Watson v. Statham. - Fraud summons. No appearance of defendant. Warrant to be issued for his apprehension. Leary v. Hunt. —Mr Stout mentioned that this case was set down for rehearing to-day After due examination of his books, Leary oundo.it that Hunt was correct, and that he was charging for the same cask twice. (Seeing that the amount had been paid by Ca'cutt, Leary had sent back a cheque for the amount. The case would, therefore, be withdrawn; but he T? 11 A he Clerk of the Court to take notice that the money had been repaid. He had better say "withdrawn by consent. »- tl^^ orShlp Baid he wns ver y § la <* to hear that the case was settled. He hoped the deeudant Hunt would take a lesson by this • for bad he done his duty he would have been saved all this trouble. -After some fur droppe!r BSlOn yMr St ° Ut ' the matter oW« V ' , Mar f al1 —Claim L2O, damage done to certain sheep on the 23rd February by being worried by defendant's dog. air Haggitt for plaintiff ; Mr A. Bathgate for defendant—Judgment was given for LlO and Wilson v. Whisker.-Claim for LSO for damages sustained through an unprovoked assault. MrE. Cook for plaintiff; Sr BatS gate for defendant. Th/facts were ahorSy a n rjrr a - Utl ? iS aU ab **<loued character* and res.des in Stuart street. (> n the evening her her and on being requested to leave, created a listurbance Unit being stated that the LackVZ 1 ? Cal i Gd hj1 ' he Wenfc t0 the back of the house and set the water tap runlag. Plaintiff went to turn the water off st U th ? back door - defendant knnot /I a V i° leUt bW on tbe nose, which knoc ked her down and from the effects of uhich she had suffered considerably— His o, 0 0 Q rS H P w¥ d au warranted aggravated S2«rS} Mn comm itted, and awarded plaintiff L4O damages with eosts.