MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXI, Issue 1789, 14 November 1879, Page 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Friday, November 14. [Before John Marshman and F. de C. Malet, Esqs.] Drunk asd Disorderly. Four first offenders were fined ss, and two experienced onoi 20s each. Breach op Railway By-Laws.—Wm. Brown was fined 10s for travelling in a railway carriage without a ticket and refusing to pay his fare Obscene Lansdaos.—Matthew Longdin, charged with making use of obaeene language on the racecourse on the 11th inst., and again on the 13th inst. in the same place, was, on the evidence of Sergeant Hughes* fined 40a, or, in default, one week’s imprisonment. Gambling.—Thomas Vaughan was charged with playing an unlawful game called roulette on the racecourse on the 13th inst. Mr Neck for the accused. Detective O’Neil explained to the Bench the nature of the game, and how the public were victimised. He saw the accused take three pools in succession, and when arrested he had more than £l9 in his possession. Mr Neck—You say you saw the accused take three pools in succession ? Witness—Yes. Mr Neck—He must have done a good business then. Witness—Yes ;he took ten or twelve shillings at a time, which I consider a very good business indeed. Mr Neck —And then you walked away ? Witness— Yes, I walked away—with him. The Bench had no doubt of the illegality of the act which had been committed, that it was a deliberately planned swindle, and that the machine was so constructed as to enable the accused to manipulate it in any manner he thought proper to his own advantage. The case being brought forward under the Vagrant Act the Bench had no option of indicting a fine. The accused was, therefore, sentenced to fourteen days’ imprisonment with hard labor. LYTTELTON. Friday, November 14. [Before Joseph Beswick, Esq., R.M.T Threatening Language.—Joseph Woolsey was presented for using threatening and abusive language to Edward Thompson. Mr Joyce appeared for the defendant.' O. Sopp and Geo. Brown gave corroborative evidence. The defendant was fined 10s. Commission Case.—Cuff and Graham, ship brokers, v J. Curran, master of the schooner Croydon Lass, claim £4 2s 9d, for oommission as brokers upon a charter from Gseymouth to Kaiapoi. Mr Joyce appeared for the defendant. The evidence given in support of the case was that the plaintiffs had received information indirectly that Mr Byrne, of Kaiapoi, wanted to charter a small vessel to carry a load of coal from Greymouth. to that port. That their representative had spoken to the defendant and offered him the charter at 20s per ton, but the defendants wanted a shilling more, so as to cover their (plaintiff's) commission of 5 per cent. The plaintiffs had afterwards sent a telegram to Mr Byrne stating what they could do. They wore not acting as the regularly authorised agents of Mr Syms, or of the defendants, but simply in the capacity of shipbrokers. The defendant subsequently negotiated the charter direct with Mr Syms. The defendant testified that the terms were arranged three or four days after he had been spoken to by the plaintiffs. He had no knowledge of Mr Syms previously, but had been introduced to him in Lyttelton as wanting a smart vessel, and they had agreed to the terms. No mention was made of the plaintiff’s, nor did he, the defendant, know that the freight which plaintiffs had spoken to him about was the same. He agreed with the charterers for 21s per ton clear. The plaintiffs esntended that the defendant obtained the charter in consequence of the action taken by them, and he was liable for the commission. The Bench thought they had failed to prove that thedefendants had benefited by the information obtained from them in such a way as made him liable to pay a commission, but that it was rather the charterer who had made use of the information. The judgment would, therefore, be for the defendant, with costs and counsel’s fee, a guinea.