MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume V, Issue 591, 11 May 1876, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, May 11. (Before G. L. Mellish, Esq, R.M.) Drunkeness. —Two inebriates were fined, one ss, the other 10s, the latter having been guilty of using obscene language. Stray Cattle. —George Osborne was fined 5s for allowing cattle to stray. General Offences. —William Graham, a lad of about seventeen, was charged with letting off fireworks in Barbadoes street. He was dismissed with a caution. John Toon, for taking a mob of horses through the city within prohibited hours, and was fined 10s. James Burrows, for obstruction, was fined 10s. Wm. Grey, for neglecting to bum a light on a certain hoarding at the comer of Colombo and Lichfield streets, was fined 10s. J. C. Carr for furious riding was fined 10s. Alfred Berry for neglecting to remain near his horse was fined 10s, Chris - topher Dalwood for allowing his bus to ply for hire to a place not advertised was dismissed. Michael Hamilton for having plied for hire at a less distance from a place of amusement than 50ft, was fined 10s. Breach or the Publicans’ Ordinance. —John Collier, licensee of the White Swan Hotel, Tuam street, was fined £5 for selling liquors within prohibited hours. Joseph Damn, of the Oxford Hotel, for neglecting to bum a light in front of his hotel, was dismissed with a caution. Poisoning Fowls.— James Stoupe was summoned for having destroyed three fowls, the property of Annie Packlington. Mr Thomas appeared for the defence. The plaintiff deposed that the defendant, who was her neighbour, had poisoned several of her fowls by throwing poisoned food to them, and enticing them to take it. A number of witnesses were exammed. The defence was that the ground was not fenced in, and that the fowls were a perfect nuisance, scratching up every seed that was put down. It appeared that the horrid deed of poisoning the fowls was committed on the •Sabbath while the good people were at church. Mr Thomas, who appeared for the defendant, said this was the first case that had been brought under the Act. It was quite time that it was against the law to lay down poison, especially on unfenced land, but the defendant was not aware of it, and he would ask the Bench to treat it as a test case. The defendant was ordered to pay 7s fid the value of the fowls and costs. It was stated by the Bench that the penalty might have been £2O, and even imprisonment. Abusive Language. —William Petlez was charged with using abusive language towards Michael Howard. Mjr Thomas appeared for the complainaqiyttWr deposed that he had been cajled pig” by the defendant,

who also said “he t had a pound in his pocket and that after he had ‘ licked ’ him, he would ‘shout’ for him.” Complainant declined the invitation to fight, upon which the defendant threatened to way-lay him, and give him a good punching. He was frightened of his wife. The defendant stated that complainant always wanted to fight him. Fined 10s and costs. Married Woman’s Protection Order. — Esther Bradley applied for an order for the protection of her earnings against her husband, George Bradley. The applicant applied for the order on the ground that her husband had left her, he being in difficulties lately. Order granted. Drunk and Disorderly. An inebriate who previously had not answered to his name when called upon, was fined 40s.