MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 918, 4 June 1877, Page 3

MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, June 4(Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., E.M.) Drunk and Using Obscene Language.— Robert Mold, who had been arrested for using obscene language at the Christchurch railway station, was fined 30s and cab fare. Drunkenness. —Walter Armstrong was fined 5s ; Albert Chadband was fined 60s and cab fare ; and Henry Lewis 10s. Two inebriates, who appeared for the first time, were each fined ss.

Vagrancy.—John Goldsberg, alias Goldsmith, was brought up under the Vagrant Act, charged with gambling at the Ashburton racecourse. Inspector Buckley told his Worship that accused had received an injury to his leg while being arrested. He had been in the hospital since then, and had only been discharged that morning. He (the Inspector) would ask for a remand to Ashburton. Eemanded until Bth inst., to be brought before the Ashburton bench.

Miscellaneous.—For obstructing Salisbury street with with shingle, John Foster was fined £l, on two informations. George James, summoned for causing an obstruction in Colombo street with his fish cart, was fined 10s. Thomas Stout, for not being in attendance on his cab, was fined 10s. A case against Wm. Janaway, for having no lights on his cab after dark, was adjourned for a week, for the production of witnesses. Horses and Cattle at Large.—For permitting horses and cattle to wander at large the following persons were each fined 5 S : —William Dixon, George Eastwick, Lewis Hamilton, John Judge, H. Hopper, William Silcock, and Eobert Crooks. For permitting a bull |to be at large, W. H. Mein was fined 40s.

Puulic-hoitse Ordinance. —J. Oram Sheppard was summoned for keeping open and selling drink in his licensed house, the White Hart Hotel, on the 20th of May, during prohibited hours. Another information, for obstructing the constable, was also preferred against defendant. Mr Thomas appeared for Mr Sheppard. Inspector Buckley asked for a remand on the charge of selling liquor, as a telegram had been received from one of the witnesses, who could not be present that day. He would go on with the charge of obstruction. Constable McDonell called, stated that about twenty minutes after 8 that night he saw a number of men coming out of the side door of the hotel. The door was immediately closed, and witness knocked. A man, whom witness had often seen about the house, and who used to be employed as barman, came to the door and opened it, and when witness asked to be allowed in to see how many more were in the bar-room, the man slammed the door and fastened it. Mr Sheppard, called by Mr Thomas, stated that the man who refused the constable admission had not been in his employ for the last six months. He had no authority to act as he had done, and was not even temporarily employed by witness. Mr Thomas submitted that under the evidence the case must be dismissed. Mr Sheppard, recalled by his Worship, said that this man was only waiting in the hotel passage for a fellow servant that day. Witness had only been away for a moment from the bar, but when leaving he asked the man to stand in the passage for a moment. Mr Thomas held that even in that case if the man had committed an illegal act, though asked to wait in the passage by Mr Sheppard, he (Mr Sheppard) could not be held to be liable. MiThomas called the man alluded to, who stated that he heard a knock at the door and went to open it, but had not been asked to do so by Mr Sheppard. He did not know the constable was at the door, and the door slammed to through there being a strong spring on it. His Worship said that possibly the obstruction had not been intentional. The charge would be dismissed. The other case would be adjourned until the 18th instant.

Assault. John Atkinson, James Atkinson, John Habberfield, John Berry, and John Warden, five lads, were charged with having assaulted Charles Menzies, at Addington, on Sunday, May 27th. Mr Joynt appeared for complainant, who stated that about 12 o'clock on that day he observed defendants playing hockey in a paddock belonging to witness, and near to his house. He went over and ordered them off the premises. John Atkinson replied that he'd see him (witness) first. Witness took him by the collar and called him a young scamp, when the boy struck him over the eye with the stick he had in his hand. _ Three of the larger boys rushed at him, got him down and kicked him violently in the face and about the body. His eye had been blacked, and his body was covered with bruises. Believod one of his ribs was broken, and he had not been able j to work since he was assaulted. Defendants ! and a number of other boys were in the habit of annoying the whole neighborhood by playing hockey, cards, and misbehaving themselves generally on Sundays. Mr Joynt called a number of witnesses, some of whom saw the assault; others had seen complainant hit one of the boys on the legs with a stick, and one detailed the nature of the injuries received by Menzies. All the witnesses complained of the conduct of a gang of boys, who are in the habit of frequenting that neighborhood on Sundays, using most disgusting language, playing cards, pulling down fences and doing much wilful damage. In reply to one of the defendants, a witness said that it was not Atkinson who told complainant he'd see him before he left the paddock; but it was the boy John Berry. A witness named Hague, called by one defendant, stated that lie saw John Atkinson kick Mr Menzies when he was down, and also saw John Warden strike him in the mouth while he was in that position. Mr Joynt trusted his Worship would treat this case as one that required some severe remedy, as it was monstrous that people should be prevented from at least spending their Sundays quietly through the larrikinism of these and other lads. His Worship called Berry's father who was in Court, and after lecturing him as to the manner in which he is bringing his son up said, he (his Worship) did not desire to record a conviction against so young a bov, and he would allow him to go, but he hoped he would receive a sound thrashing. James Atkinson, John Habberfield, and John Warden would be fined 40s and costs, or in default one week's imprisonment with hard labor. John Atkinson would be fined 20s, in default four days' imprisonment with hard labor, and ho would advise defendants to give up this larrikinism or they would find it worse for them in the end. Violent Assault.—Edward Hanton and Edward Jones were charged with violently assaulting John Barlow, landlord of the Papanui Hotel. Mr Thomas appeared for complainant, and M? I?ard, for Jones. from

the evidence it appeared that about ten minutes to eleven o'clock on the 19th May, after the bar had been closed, the defendants, with two others, knocked at the front door, said they were travellers, and on being admitted, asked for a bottle of brandy. They were served with it, and asked for another, for which they refused to pay the full price. On being remonstrated with, Hanton struck complainant, who, with a lodger, tried to put them out. Both defendants and the others broke in the door and struck complainant and the lodger (the latter being struck with a chair), after which Mr Barlow was dragged ou'sile, struck, and kicked violently, from the effects of which he bled for about three hours. After Mr Barlow was got inside the men broke eight panes of glass and the lamp. Dr Powell, called, slated that complainant's face was terribly battered. He had a lacerated cut on one corner of the mouth, and another in the interior of the cheek. There had been a risk of erysipelas setting in from these wounds, and the lump on complainant's face might yet result in abscess. The injuries appeared to have been done by kicking. Evidence was given by two witnesses who were passing the house that night, and attracted by the cries of murder went inside. The place was in darkness, and on striking a match saw Hanton kicking Mr Barlow, who was on the floor. Pulled the man away, and begged of him not to murder the man. "When the men got outside saw Hanton and a man not in court break several panes of glass and the lamp in front of his house. After counsel had addressed the Bench, Mr Thomas, dwelling strongly on the serious nature of the assault, his Worship told Hanton that he had been the ringleader. He would not have the opportunity of paying a fine, and would be sentenced to one month's imprisonment with hard labour. Hanton made a statement in which lie stated that he had been dragged in (hat night by Barlow and Haines, forced on to a table and pummelled by them. That it was half-past eleven when they were served with the brandy, and had the door not been opened a seeond time the assault would not have been committed. His Worship told Jones that he would not impose a heavy fine on him, as the costs would be heavy. Fined 10s, and costs £4 ss.