MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1884, 8 March 1880, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, Maboh 8. \ [Before Dr. Deamer, J. P- Jameson, Esq[, and J. E. Parker, Esq , J.P.’s] , Stebkt Distdebancb. was charged with creating a disturbance in High street on Saturday night. As she had been locked uo linoe the Bench dismissed the case. _ Lunacy. —Samuel Laird was charged with lunacy through excessive drinking, and remanded to Lyttelton for eight days / for medical treatment. Susannah Doddsworth, brought up on a similar charge, was now pronounced convalescent and discharged. Pause Pebtbnobs.—Montague Mosley, remanded from Saturday, was brought up on a charge of obtaining 3s from Richard Leaver by false pretences. Me Stringer appeared for the accused. The prosecutor, ■leaver, a tailor, carrying on business in Christchurch, said that during the month of ■ October, J. 879, he had made a suit of clothes for the accused, and delivered them to him. They were not paid for at the time. The nrico e£ them was £6 6s. Accused also owed Slim 15s, which ho had not rendered an account for. He had asked for the money several times, and on the 2nd ult. accused gave him a cheque for £7 12a, and received 3s change. On presenting the cheque at the Colonial Hank on the 4th, it wus returned marked “Not provided for.” By Mr Stringer—The price of the clothes was £6 6a, but the amount, £7 12s, was made up with the 15a owing, and 8s law expenses incurred in suing for the money. Witness held over the cheque until the 4th iast., at the request of the accused. As in cross-examination it transpired that the prosecutor had taken possession of certain furniture belonging to the accused as security for payment of the money, or that the cheque would be provided for, the Bench dismissed the case.

Illegal Bathing. Thomas Buclaoan, Edward Buchanan, Thomas Dunphy, Edward Dunphy, and Wm. McCormick were charged with bathing within view of a public place. The defendants were all lads, and the police withdrew the charge against the two smallest, E. Dunphy and B. Buchanan. McCormick had falsely given the name of O’Malley, and had given the police some trouble to find him. Evidence was given of the offence, and Sergt. Morice stated that it was not the actual bathing that was complained of but the disgraceful exhibition of themselves by the bathers when out of the water, and the disgraceful language they made use of. The bathing took place at the shed lately erected by the Sydenham Borongh Council, which afforded little or no concealment to the bathers, Mr Williams, who appeared on behalf of Mr Anderson, a resident on the river banks, stated that the bathing-shed had no business to have been placed there. -It was on a public (ewingpath, and Mr Anderson or anyone else would be justified in removing it. The Sydney ham Borough Council had no right to put the shed up where it was. Mr Anderson entered the witness box, and said it was not so much the children e.s the men, who were in the habit of bathing in the river, that he complained of. His wife could not get out of her house on Sundays without having her feelings outraged, and ladies could not approach the house. As a matter of fact, a party of ladies had actually turned back, scared by the sight and sounds of the bathers. The Bench dismissed the oases, on the friends of the lads promising they would not offend again. At the same time the Bench cautioned them that if brought up again they would be heavily fined, as there were proper hours in which persons could bathe without offence to the public. Grown up offenders would be still more severely dealt with, Hoese and Cattle Tesbpass. —A. Ashworth, Thomas Braithwaite, Albert Bull, and James Bowman were fined in the usual penalty.