MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume II, Issue 201, 30 January 1875, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Saturday, January 30, (Before G. L. Mellish, Esq, R.M., and his Worship the Mayor.) DRUNK AND DISORDERLY, William Hull, arrested for being drunk at the railway station was fined ss. James Sullivan for drunkenness was fined in a similar amount. CRUELTY TO A WIFE, Emma Borland applied for protection for her earnings in consequence of her husband’s continued ill-treatment. Mrs Borland stated that her husband was in the habit of continually ill-treating her. She had borne with it for a long time, and now wished that her'earnings might be protected. Order granted as desired, THE CAB CASE. H. M. Goodyer was charged with wilful destruction of public property. A second charge was laid against defendant for behaving so that the passage along the street was obstructed by causing a crowd to collect. Dr Foster appeared to support the charge, and Messrs Garrick and Cowlishaw for defendant. Sergeant Wilson examined, stated that he was on duty in the street between twenty minutes and a quarter-past one the previous day, opposite Cobb and Co’s, and saw a crowd there. About that time he saw a number of cabmen collected coming up from the Bank of New Zealand corner. They all stopped in front of Cobb and Go’s office, and remained there for about seven minutes. They evidently got a signal from some man, he didn’t know whom. Defendant was among the cabmen. All of a sudden there was a rush made at the fence around the cab stand. He saw the defendant catch hold of one of the palings and stretchers, pull it away, and place it on one side off from the cab stand. The Mayor was standing by at the time, and told him to take defendant into custody, which he (witness) did. Defendant deliberately removed the paling and stretcher. The palings and stretchers were put up as a fence all round the cab stand. He did not examine whether they were nailed or not, but from the force with which they were dragged away some of them cracked. The Mayor gave the defendant into custody for wilful destruction of public property, and he took him in charge. Cross-examined by Mr Garrick - I saw a number of cabmen coming from the direction of the Bank of New Zealand. They drove up—about a dozen cabs—and stopped at the cab stand. The cabs had been in the habit of standing there up to that morning. I have seen the defendant standing there, and he usually stood there with his cab. When they drove up the stand was erected with a fence composed of stretchers and palings laid lengthways on top of them. - The stretchers were not Jet into, but resting upon the

ground. A rush waa made at the fence, the defendant being amongst the others. I saw him first pull a paling, and he then took hold of a wooden horse and pulled it to one side. I only saw him remove these two, and that was all he did until he was ordered to be arrested. I made no examination of the wooden horse or paling. I can’t say whether the horse or paling were anything the worse for their removal, though I heard the paling or horse “creak.” When removed the articles he placed them in a direct line with the footpath. He was then taken into custody by me. The Mayor was standing by at the time, and said “ take him into custody, ” and I did so. This was what the Mayor said to the best of my recollection. I spoke to the Mayor afterwards. He (the Mayor) followed us to the depot. It waa there he made the charge. I took defendant to the depot in a cab, and not on one of the wooden houses. (Laughter.) The watchhousekeeper entered the charge taken from the Mayor. The charge was wilful destruction of property, and the Mayor said there would be a second charge of behaving so as to collect a crowd in a public thoroughfare. That was the substance of what he said. The cabmen were unable to get on the stand through the fence that was around it.

His Worship said that at that stage of the proceedings it would perhaps be as well to adjourn the case, Dr Foster still having the discretion to re-examine on any fresh matter that might have come out in the cross-ex-amination. The case would be adjourned until Wednesday next, defendant to be admitted to bail on his own recognisances in the sum of £2O.

Mr Garrick contended that* the offence was not a bailable one. He was geing to ask that the charge might be dismissed, as there was not, he considered, a tittle of evidence against his client. He would only consider this action as an aggravation in any future proceedings that might be taken. His Worship—But the defendant is still in custody.

Mr Garrick—But he should never have been, and Ido not think he ought to be retained in custody. Two wrongs do not make a right. Dr Foster said he did not wish that any specified sum should be stated for defendant’s reappearance. He was quite willing that the bail should bo a nominal one, or that defendant should be admitted to bail on his own recognisances. His Worship then altered the bail to £lO on defendant’s own recognisances. The case to stand adjourned until Wednesday next. LYTTELTON. [Before W. Donald, Esq., R.M.] Friday, January 29. CIVIL CASES. Nalder v C. T. Brown ; judgment by consent for £5 3s, and 9s costs. Nalder v Gallagher, claim £3 3s lOd, for law expenses; a set off of £3 was filed; judgment for plaintiff for £2 8s lOd, and costs 16s. W. Holmes v Gallagher, claim £7 ss, for rent of house ; Mr Nalder appeared for W. Holmes ; judgment for plaintiff for £4 ss, and costs 13s. A temporary transfer of license of the Victoria Dining Rooms from D. Lazarus to Henry Hardiske was applied for. The Bench were satisfied, from inquiries made, that the applicant bore a good character, &c., and therefore granted the transfer.

The following is the score:— Canterbury.—First innings. A. Ollivier (captain)—1,1,1,1,1,2,1,4,1,4, 2,1,2,1,3,3,1,4,4,1,1,3,1,1,1,1,4,1, 0 Lambert, b Paramour ... 52 W. F. Nielson—1,1, c Glen, b Downes ... 2 C. 0. Corfe —2,4,1,3,1,1,1,2,1,4,1,1,4,1,2, 1.1.1,1,2,2,1,1,1,5,2,1,3,1,2,2,3,1,1,4,5, 2.1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3,1, 1 b w, b Tait ... 88 T. S. Baker—4,1,4,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,4,1,2,1,2, 3,2,2, run out ... 33 G. H. Lee—1,4,1,2,1,3,2,2,1,1,1,1,4,1, b Paramor ... ... 25 E. Fowler—5,2,2,3,1,3,3,1,4,2.3,2,1,2,3, 2,1, c Paramor, b Glen ... 40 B. G. J. Stevens, b Paramor ... 0 J. Fowler—1,2,1,1,1,1,1,3,1,2,2,1,1,3,1,3, 1,2,1,1,2,3,1,1,1,3,2,1,2,1,1, not out ... 48 T. S. Sweet—3,2,5,1,1,4,1,1,1,1, c Glen, b Downes ... .. 20 E. T. A. Fuller—1,2.4,1,1,2, c Collinson, b Glen .. 11 T. R. Moore —1,1, c Fulton, b Glen .. 2 Byes .. 16 Leg-byes Wides ., 4 .. 12 No ball .. 1 354 Otago.—First Innings. G. Allen, 2,1, b Sweet .. 3 G. Sampson, 1,1,1,1,3,1, b Sweet ... .. 8 H. B. Godby, 3,1,1,1,1,1,2,1.1,1,5,1,2,3, b Moore .. 24 G. Paramor, 1,1,1.2,1,1,3,3,2,4,1,1,4,1,2,2,1, 1,1,mi,3,1,4,3,1,3,1,3,1,1,3,2, c and b Lee .. 62 E. T. Collinson, 1,3,2,1,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1, b Sweet .. 16 J. C. Fulton, 2,4,1,1, b Sweet W. Tait, 1,1,1,1, st Ollivier, b Sweet .. 8 .. 4 L. Lambert, 2,4, b Fuller .. 6 D. K. Rhodes, b Sweet .. 0 A. Glen, b Sweet .. 0 W. F. Downes, not out .. 0 Byes .. 5 Leg-byes .. 10 Wides . 2 Total 148 Otago—Second Innings. G, Allen, 2, b Sweet 2 G. Sampson, 1, 1, b Sweet 2 L. Lambert, 4, 3, b Fuller 7 Paramor, 1, 2, ct Stevens, b Fuller ... 3 Godby, 2,1,2,2,1,2,1,1,1,3,1,1,1,2, c Ollivier, b Fuller 21 Collinson, 2,1,3,1, c Moore, b Fuller ... Downes, 2,2,3, b Sweet 7 7 J. C. Fulton, 1 bw, b Fuller ... 0 Tait, 1, b Sweet 1 Glen, 2, b Sweet 2 D. K. Rhodes, 1, not out 1 Leg byes 2 Total 56 ANALYSIS OF BOWLING. Canterbury— First Innings, Balls. Runs. Maiden overs. Wickets, Wides. !i o fc Glen ... 220 97 17 3 0 0 Downes ... 96 33 12 2 0 0 Tait ... 48 26 1 1 10 0 Paramor ... 152 90 11 3 0 0 Fulton ... 64 44 2 0 2 0 Lambert... 49 31 3 0 0 1 OTAGO— First innings. d -2 . «n OD >a 2 .M s % Sweet 124 34 17 7 2 Lee 96 27 10 1 0 Moore ... ... 72 35 4 1 0 Fuller ... ... 84 35 7 1 0 Second Innings. Sweet ... ... 88 25 8 5 0 Fuller 87 28 8 5 0