MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.
CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, February 18. [Before G. L. Hellish, Esq., R.M.] Assault. —Anthony Eggleton was charged with havinghissaulted his wife, Mary Eggleton, on the 11th February. The complainant told the Bench that her husband had promised to abstain from drink in the future, and she would ask permission to wit hdraw the information. His Worship granted the request but was afraid he would soon sea the parties in Court again. James Heslop and Ellen Heslop were summoned for assaulting A. W. Wright by throwing water on him. The parties are neighbours and have been before the Court on one or two occasions. The last occasion was the 11th inst., and according to complainant, on the evening of that day he was passing defendant’s place, when a jug of water was thrown over him; while he was engaged in wiping it off, a second jug was thrown over him. The first jug was thrown by Mrs Heslop, and after the second was thrown he saw a jug in Heslop’s hands. Corroborative evidence of the water throwing was given. A witness, colled by the defendant, deposed to Mr Wright having walked up and down in front of Heslop’s place with a whip in his hand, and was making faces to annoy Heslop, He also leant against the side of defendant’s door. Believed Wright must have been under the influence of drink. His Worship dismissed the case against Heslop. At the request of Heslop he was examined, and stated that his wife had thrown the water, but it was after she had received very great provocation from Wright, who came to the door and told her she had perjured herself in Court, and could have a spree on (he money she received. His Worship told Mrs Heslop she had no right to take the law into her own hands, she would be fined 20s and 2s Gd costs. Throwing Stones and Assault.— A lad named Knapman, who was called in the case against E. A. demon, was now in attendance, and stated that he saw demon throw a stone at Mr Coleman’s rails, Mr Coleman told his Worship that he did not desire a fine to be inflicted. His Worship dismissed the charge of assault, and ordered the boy to pay 6s 6d costs in the other case. Tuesday, Febeuaey 19. [Before G. L. Mcliish, Esq., E.M.] Drunkenness.—Mary Maule was fined 40s. Margaret Shannon, who stated that she had been arrested in her own house in Lichfield street, was remanded until the following day, the charge to be withdrawn if she left by steamer as promised. A first offender was fined ss.
Larceny from a Dwelling.— Jeremiah John KiorJan was charged with stealing £lO, a gold pin, silver pencil and toothpeck, from the house of Mr John Jones, Cashel street east. Inspector Hickson told the Bench that accused had been arrested late the previous evening. Part of the property had been found on him, and ho (the Inspector) would ask for a few days to allow of the remaining portion of the property being traced if possible. Remanded until 22ud inst. LYTTELTON. Tuesday. February 10. rUcJore W. Donald, Esq., K.M„ and J. T. Rouse, Esq., J P.] Drunkenness. — J. Hanker and J. Macalistor were lined 10s each for this offence. Lunacy.—Abraham Denton was discharged on his wife’s promising to take charge of him. Absent Without Leave. Thomas Luberb, a seaman belonging to the Mary AfiStemw w«8 charged by the master, Captais
M'Kenzie, with this offence. Accused was ordered on board. Larceny —Keziah Dale, a girl aged twelve years, was charged with this offence. Accused, who has been guilty of numerous pett y thefts, was sent to Burnham reformatory for four years, to be brought up according to the tenets of the Church of England. Aggravated Assault ok a Child.— Edward Martin was charged with an offence of this nature. The evidence was unfit for publication. The Bench sentenced accused to six months’ imprisonment with hard labor, commenting on the enormity of the offence, stating accused was a perfect pest to society.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GLOBE18780219.2.12
Bibliographic details
Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1236, 19 February 1878, Page 2
Word Count
679MAGISTRATES’ COURTS. Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1236, 19 February 1878, Page 2
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.