MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 412, 7 October 1875, Page 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, October 7. (Before G. L. Mellish, Esq, R.M.) Drunk and Disorderly. —John Gaynor, charged with drunkenness, and against whom there had been several previous convictions, was fined 40s ; Frederick Mills was fined ss; and Michael Ryan, for being drunk, was discharged with a caution. Larceny from the Person. Ellen Thompson was brought up on this charge. Constable Ginn stated that on a report being made to him the previous day, he proceeded to the Caversham Hotel, and on arriving there a man named James Williamson accused the prisoner of putting her hand into his pocket and stealing three onepound notes. On taking her to the depot, the female searcher found only 2s Gd on her. She denied taking the money. By prisoner—l afterwards saw the prosecutor take two £1 notes|out of his pocket, which he said he must have forgotten. James Williamson stated that he was driving about with the accused the previous day. While they were in the cab he felt her put her hand into his left trowsers pocket and take three £1 notes out. He knew he had the notes in his pocket when he got into the cab. To the Bench On arriving at the depot I found two £1 notes in my pocket, but I don’t know who put them there. The prosecutor, who while giving his evidence had exhibited unmistakeable symptoms of intoxication, was sent to the depot for twenty four hours for contempt of Court. The woman was discharged. Horses and Cattle at Large.— For permitting horses and cattle to wander, the following persons were dealt with : —John Otley fined ss, Robert Thompson ss, E. Berry ss, and Thomas Aldridge ss.

Absent from Horse and Vehicle. —For the above offence John Top, James Davis, Henry McConnell, George Cooper, and Alfred Wright were each fined 10s. Neglecting to keep a Light.— Joseph Allan, charged on two informations with neglecting to keep a light burning on a hoarding erected by him in Cashel street, was fined £l. Absent prom Cab. —Peter Hamilton was summoned for being absent from his horse and cab, and allowing it to run away. It was shown that the horse bolting was only the result of an accident, and the case was dismissed. Frederick Chambers was summoned for a similar offence. There were no extenuating circumstances in this case, and defendant was fined 10s and expense of witness. William Edwards, similarly charged, was fined 10s. Carrying Excess op Passengers Michael Hamilton was summoned for carrying three passengers from the Oddfellows’ Hall. The constable stated that Andrew McTaggart had told him that defendant had carried three passenger in bis cab on the night of the 2oth September. Andrew McTaggart called, stated that he had seen defendant carry three passengers on that night for about thirty or forty yards. When he (witness) challenged him, one of the passengers got out, but afterwards stepped on to the springs and was driven away in that fashion. Defendant said that three passengers got into his cab before he could get on to his seat. When he told them that he was not allowed to carry that number one got out, but shortly after he (defendant) started this gentleman afterwards jumped on the spring. He (defendant) produced the bye-law, to show that under it one person could be carried on the spring by permission of the other passengers. If his Worship would adjourn the case for a week, he would bring witnesses to prove that what he had stated were the facts. McTaggart recalled, in reply to defendant, said it might have been ten yards past Fulton’s where he (defendant) pulled up. Fined 10s.

Riding on Footpath. —For this offence Harry Green, Joseph Moflfatt, and Walter Blake were each fined 10s. Using Threatening Language,— James Davis was charged with using abusive and t hreatening language to Constable Prescott. The language had been used by defendant when the constable went to him to ask him his name on the charge of being absent from his horse. Fined 20s. Breach of Domain Bye-laws.— Robert McClaren was charged with permitting his dog to follow him in the Domain. Defendant admitted the offence and was fined 10s, Defendant said he was unable to pay the fine, and was told he would have to take the alternative. Breach of Public House Ordinance, —Thomas S, Suart was charged with selling drink and keeping his licensed house, the Britannia Hotel, open during prohibited hours, on Sunday, 2(ith September. Mr Thomas, who appeared for the defendant, said he would admit on behalf of his client that the house was .open for the purpose of washing the bar, and two persons went in and were served with a drink- Fined £5. A similar charge against Henry Lewis, of the Devonshire Arms Hotel, was adjourned for a week. Breach op Sheep Ordinance.—Wm. Saville was charged with driving some sheep across Mr Templar’s run on the 27th September last, without giving the necessary nolice required under the 40th section of (he Ordinance, Mr Thomas appeared for the

defendant. From the remarks of Mr Thomas and the complainant, it was shown that these sheeep, which belonged to Mr Templar, had been driven by defendant on the road to the pound. His Worship said he hardly saw how he could get over the section of the Act stipulating the notice that was required to be given. Mr Thomas said this was a case where the section of the Act seemed very harsh and absurd, as the cockatoo or small farmer, if he had a piece of land on a settler’s run without being legally fenced, might, having to give 24 hours’ notice to the settler, be completely ruined, as, unless so fenced, he couid not recover one shilling damages. As this was a case of general interest, and affecting a very large section of farmers, it was his intention, if his Worship was against him, to take it further. The sheep had been taken by defendant off his own land, and he could produce evidence to show that they had been kept srictly on the main road while being driven to the pound. Mr Thomas, called, George White, who said he knew Mr Templar’s run, as he with others were contracting through it. Was present in the middle of the day when defendant called his dog to drive some sheep out of his own paddock. He drove them very quietly along the road, one chain wide. To the Bench— He was quite sure that not even a single sheep strayed off the road, while defendant was passing him. In reply to complainant, witness said he was about thirty chains from defendant when he first commenced to drive the sheep, He only knew that while the sheep were passing him none of them strayed off the road. Mr Thomas asked his Worship to give his decision then, as it was his (Mr Thomas) intention to take the case to appeal. His Worship said the section did not define what state the sheep must be in, and supposing the sheep had been scabby it would have been certainly necessary that twenty-four hours’ notice should have been given. Mr Thomas pointed out the hardship (hat would result to a farmer if his Worship’s decision was against him, as he would again say that if a poor man had a section in the middle of a run, ho would simply be at the mercy of a settler, if he were required to give twenty-fours’ notice before he could drive trespassing sheep to a pound. Nor could such a person recover damages in any case unless he were legally fenced. If defendant had been driving his own or a neighbor’s sheep to a pound it would have been far different, but to have to give notice to Mr Templar of the brands of his own sheep, and of the intention to drive those sheep which had been running on his own run. to a pound before they could be removed, seemed to him to be a very great absurdity. His Worship admitted this, but did not see how the 40th section could be got rid of. It was one of those cases, however, in which a great deal had been left to the discretion of the magistrate. He would dismiss the case on the payment of costs by defendant. Mr Thomas, after consideration, said he would pay the costs in this case (9s lOd), but had advised his client to do the same thing over again with a smaller number of sheep, with a view to bring the matter before the Supreme Court. ASSAULT. —R. Rastrick was summoned for assaulting George Pellatt on the 21st September. The misunderstanding had been caused about a boundary fence, which had resulted in defendant striking complainant a slight blow with a stick. His Worship said the case was a very trivial one, and inflicted a fine of 10s. Using Abusive Language. W. B. Tembey was charged with using abusive languge to his sister-in-law, Rosa Tembey. The evidence showed that all the family are living together in the Valley, and other than endearing language seemed to be frequently used by several of the members. The husband of the complainant appeared to give evidence against, her, and his {Worship told him that the evidence he had given with a desire to cast opprobrium on his wife was not very creditable to him. Defendant would be fined 10s and expense of witness. Samuel Dobbinson was charged with using abusive language to James Mathews in St Asaph street. The offence was proved, and a fine of 20s was inflicted. Slaughter house Licenses. —The following applications were granted : —Richard Brown, section 113, Riccarton district; T. W. S. Berry, section 6194, Sandhills ; Peter Muir, section 1200, Springston ; T. B. McRae, section 20,396, Ashburton.