MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1931, 3 May 1880, Page 3

MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

OHRISTCHURCH. Monday, May 3. [Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.] Dsvsk and Disobdbbly.—William Smith, in addition to drunkenness, was oharged with resisting the police and destroying private property. Fined 20a, and ordered to pay the cost of the damaged property. One drunkard was fined 20s. Two first offenders were fined 5s each.

MISCBIiIiANBOTJB. A number of persons were fined 5s and costs, for allowing horses and cattle to wander at large. Thomas Rowe was fined 5s for riding on the footpath after cattle at Riocarton. Edwin Lock, jun., summoned for tethering a horse across the footpath at Philipstown, was fined 10a and coßts. Bbeach of Ptjbhc Hottsb Obdinancb. — John Toorey, licensee of the Star and Garter Hotel, was summoned for selling liquor on Sunday, April B'h. The offence was admitted, and a fine of £5 inflicted. CAT73IN& an OBaißtrcnoN. —John Earland was fined 10s for tethering a horse on the Bauth Town Belt. Pbotection Obdbb. —Adelaide Boyd applied for an order to protect her property and earnings against her husband, James Boyd, on the ground of continued drunkenness and cruelty. Order granted. SSHMN& Game Ottt op Sbason. —Elizabeth Dennis was summoned for having on the 9th of April in her possession illegally and without lawful excuse certain game, to wit two hares, and further with selling and offering the Bamo for sale. In connection with this case, T. H. Morgan was summoned for buying or offering to buy certain game, to wit two hares, and with having the same illegally in his possession. The proceedings were brought under the Protection to Animals Act, Mr Harper appaaring on behalf of the Acclimatisation Society. Mr Cowlishaw on behalf of Mr Morgan. Both cases were heard together. Evidence of the_ possession and sale of the alleged game was given by the Banger. For the defence, Mrs Dennis said she had purchased the hares for rabbits. As none of "the members of the Council of the Acclimatisation Sjciety appeared in Court, the informations were dismissed on the ground of insufficient evidence.