SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4086, 31 March 1876, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

IN BANCO. Friday, March 31. (Before Mr Justice 1 Williams.)

Briggs v. Conn.—Special case, submitted for the opinion of the Court. Mr Stout for the appellant; Mr Smith for the respondent.—Mr Stout said the information alleged that in the month of January last one David Briggs was charged at the Magistrate’s Court with wilfully and unlawfully obstructing a crossing in Bond street by backing hid vehicle across it while loading contrary to the City bye-laws, and was fined Is-and costs (5s 6d). Counsel now contended that this was a wrongful decision on several grounds, the principal being that the judgment wished to limit the meaning of the word “ crossing" to a way over a piecebf land which was open only tor tramo to pass and repass without stoppage.—Mr Smith argued, that taking the natural meaning of the words used there could belittle doubt as to the propriety of the magistrate’s decision.—His Honor said that as he had some doubt as to the real meaning otthe word M.crosaing,”andas there considerable interests involved in the matter he would take time to consider his decision. ' Be The Submarine Qoldminino Company (Limited). —This was an application for a mle nisi calling upon S. C. Harvey ana W. G; Ball to show; cause why certain, orders made in this Court with reference to the winding-up of the Tokomoiriro. Goldmining Company (Limited), on the ground that the Court had uo jurisdiction to ’ prondmoe the winding-up order, and on other minor grounds should not he set aside Mr Stout, with him Mr Mouat, appeared to move the rule absolute; Mr Macassey to show cause. [Left sitting.]