MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2243, 6 May 1881, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

OHRISTOHURCH. Thttbbbat, Mat 5.

TBafore J. Ollivior and J. E. Barker, Esqrs., J.P. 's] Civil Cases.—Mason, Struthors and Co. v Benning, claim 13s 9d for the supply of a ■hackle for a reaping machine. Defendant deposed that he bought and paid for a maohine from plaintiffs as porfoot ; afterwards they sent him in a bill for the shackle 03 an extra. It was not an extra ; he could not work the maohine without it. Plaintiffs were not prepared to prove the contrary, and judgment was given for dofendant, with coßts, and he was allowed hia expenses for attending Court, 17s 9d. Hutchinson v West, £6 9a, balance due, for painting and papering house, supply of material, &s. Mr Stringer for plaintiff, Mr Joyce for defendant. Defendant said the charge was exorbitant, and after hearing evidence the Court gave judgment for defendant with costs. Andrews v Henaloy. Mr Stringer for plaintiff, Mr Joyce for defendant. This was an action for the recovery of certain property, to wit, a house and two acres of land, under the following circumstances : .'.a 1879 tho parties became associated in the fattening of pigs. Plaintiff found the money for their purchase. Defendant collaotod the " swill," &0., and fed them. After some time a seotion of land, two acreß, was purchased and a house built thereon, and a horse and cart bought, for which plaintiff olbo found tho money. Defendant being paid by half the profit dorived from the sale of tho pigs, half of the ront at an understood value boing doducted from hia share ao he occupied the cottage. While the business was in full swing defendant filed his achedule, in whioh he included among the assets tho property in question. The trustee accordingly took possession of the place, whioh defendant still occupied, paying rent to the trustoo in the estate, and tho present action was brought by pluintiff to obtain possession of it. The defence was that there was a partnership between the parties which included the houae and land, as well as I tbo fattening and selling of pigs. The Bench, I after hearing evidonce, thought that defendant had no right whatever to the property, and ordered the property to be delivered up within seven days. Coopor v Orwell, claim £5 for damage done to fencing and crop by the trespass of a cow. Judgment for plaintiff for 15s. In Stoop v Martin, £4 0s lOd. judgment was given for plaintiff. Judgments by default wore given for plaintiffs in Hobbs and Co. v Carrol, £lO ; Raphael v Ruddick, £7 ; Elingenstein v Wilson, £1; Webb v Nelson, £3 12s 6d; Sydenham Borongh Council v Orabtree, £3 4s 2d ; same v Gay, £3 4j 2d ; same v Sorimahaw, £1 4j 9d ; same v Barnett, £5 Os lOd ; Treleaven v Haok, £4 15s ; and Earnshaw v Orabtree, £l6 10s 6d. Ooatea and Co. v Stewart, and Wyllie v Light were adjourned till May 12th. Fbiday, May 6. [Before J. Ollivier and J. E. Parker, Esqrs., J.P.'s] Dbuneenness. Thos. Pardoe, on bis third appearance in the year on this charge, was fined 20s. G-00. Wenlcck,who was found i drunk in charge of a horse and cart, was fined : 30s, or twenty-four hours' imprisonment. I Uttbbing a Fobgbd Cheque.—George Wood, brought up on this charge, reminded from Ashburton, was again remanded until May 13th. , fjABCBNY PBOM THE PERSON. —Gcorgo I Thomas Lovett was brought up, on remand j from the 3rd instant, charged with this offence. Dennis Murphy, a labourer, of Lin- , coin, deposed that on the 2nd instant ho came to Ohristohurch, and, at half-past six p.m., was the worse for liquor. He then met prisoner at the New Zealand Restaurant, Manchester atreet South, where he had gone to ■get something to eat. He put down a lovereign on the table, and accused picked it up, paid for the meals, and put the change in his pocket. They both went out, and afterwards went into the private bar of some public- , house which prosecutor did not know. He then had one sovereign and seven one-pound ; notes in his vest pocket. He and accused had , aome drinks and wont into another public- , house, where, after having more drink, \ accused slipped his band inta prosecutor's , pocket, took out the money, and went out ( into the atreet. Prosecutor saw the money in < the hand of acoused. He followed ao- ( ouaed but could not find him. He < next saw prioner on the following \ morning, between nine and ten o'clock, at the same eating-house, when he gave prisoner . into custody. Daniel Alabaster, a boy of i fourteen years, stated he was a waiter in the i New Zealand restaurant. He saw prosecutor and prisoner at that place about seven p.m. \ on the 2nd inst. Prisoner called for meals for both; they sat at the same table ; each , had two meals, which they ate. Prisoner . paid for the meals with a sovereign, and re- , oeired the change. They then left. Pri- ] soner was sober. Prosecutor was a little bit drunk, but knew what he was doing. On the , following morning, between nine and ten • o'clock, prisoner oame in for breakfast. \ John Erneat said he waa "steward" at the Al Hotel. He knew prisoner to have been \ employed about - two months as " generally , useful" man. Ho left on April 13th. He , was dismissed for keeping late hoars. . He was paid off, but he handed the money coming to him, £3 Os Si, to witness, to whom he owed over 1 four pounds. Witness afterwards gave prisoner ss. Edward Battin, barman at the White Hart Hotel, Ohriitchurch, deposed that he knew prisoner slightly. On the morning of the 2nd inßt. saw him in the bar of the White Hart, when witness lent him 5s to get some " tucker" with. Ho said he was penniless. Witness saw him again in the evening botween eight and nine, when he handed witness throe one pound notes. He owed witness £2 sa. He told witness to keep the surplus 15s. Witness saw him again about nine on the morning of the 3rd, when he asked for and got 10s from witness. Constable Allen stated that he arrested prisoner at the New Zealand restaurant between nine and ten o'clock on the morning of May 3rd. He was given in charge by proseoutor who said " that ia the man that robbed me of Beven pound notes and a sovereign." Prisoner said he did not know prosecutor. There was 9s 5d in prisoner's pocketa. The barman at tho White Hart Hotel gave up £2 10a, which had been given to him by priaoner. Prisoner bad nothing to say in answer to the above evidonce, and was committed to take his trial at the next sessions of the Supreme Court at Christch arch. Application pob Rehearing.—Mr Joyce applied for a rehearing of the case, Schott v Schott, on the ground that fresh evidence had turned up, whioh, if produced at the former hearing, would have materially affected the issue. His Worship said consideration of the application would be postponed till it had been made in the form prescribed by the rules of the Court.

80UTHBRIDGE. Tnr/BSDAY, May 5. [Before B. J. Lee, H. P. Hill, J. B. Campbell and R. B. Willis, Esqs., J.P.'s] Tbbsfabs. —Wm. Stewart was fined £2 and costs for illegally trespassing in pursuit of game. Dbuhkbnnbss. —A. Macintosh, for being drunk and using obscene language, was fined £l, and for being drunk and disorderly on another occasion £2. Obstructing thb Police.—J. Graham, for wilfully obstructing police in the execution of their duty, was fined £2,'and for being drunk and incapable £l. Civil Cask. —Gamble v Smith, claim £5 10s ; judgment was given for plaintiff for £5 and costs. AMBERLEY. Thubbdat, May 5. [Before O. Whitofoord, R.M., and A. Broadfoot and W. 0. Fend all, Esqs.] Public Works Act.—An application undor the Publio Works Act, 1876, was mode by Henry Lough, jun., to drain into land situate at Brown's' Bridge, the property of one Smith, who wan represented by his guardian, 0. O'Malley. Mr George Harpor appeared for applicant and Mr McOonnel for respondent. In opening the case, Mr Harper stated that all the necessary steps had been taken, and this wob allowed by Mr McOonnel, who, however, would raise the point that Lough's land did not adjoin the applicant's, as required by the Act. The Benoh took a note of thin, but would not allow it. Henry Lough, jun., deposed that to drain his land completely ho mußt got the water through O'Malley's land. Between his land and O'Malley's thero were two other properties, owned by Hill and Farquhar, who were willing to allow the drainage through their land —the permission was not in writing. Mr McConnel would submit that a great injustice would be done his client if Lough was allowed to drain his land on to O'Malley's, and thus put his client to the expense of taking a similar action to the present ono in order to get rid of the water thus brought.

Mr Lough should begin at the lowest down, and thus work up. The Bench did not see how any order could be made, except on the defendant. Any other proceedings would have to be done in proper form. Witness continued, there was a defined water course from his land through Farqubar's, Hill's, and O'Malley's land, whence it would go through the Rev. Clacks' land, and several other properties towards the eea. The oreek was dry sometimes. The plans produced propoied to widen and deepon the natural wateroourse through Cifalloy's, which would improve tho land, as it is now very swampy. Several people were contributing towards the cost of this , application, Mr Courage amongst others, the Road Board were also going to contribute. Numerous witnesses were examined for the applicant, who generally deposed to tho proposed plan of drain as shown to be in the natural watercourse as nearly as possible, and wore unanimous that O'Malloy's land would be improved by tho drain. O. O'Malley—guardian of one Smith, an infant —gave evidence to the effect that a drain, as suggested, would materially damage his property, and that there was another outlet. The land at present was producing splendid feed, and he never know any cattie to be bogged. The place is used as a grazing farm. Messrs Brown, Griffiths, Hadler, and Tobin gave corroborative evidence. Tho ca?e was_ adiourned for further evidence, his Worship to fix a day for hearing the legal points in Christchurch.

Civit Oases. —M. Lynskey v W. T. Ferrar, hon. secretary Amberley race committee, claim £5 In this case M. Lynskey appeared on behalf of bis son, a minor, to recover the sum claimed, which was the amount of the stakes in a Pony race run at the last Amberley meeting, in which plaintiff's pony came in first, but was disqualified ao being over 14 hands. Evidence as the pony's height was given by Messrs Fulton, Captain Parsons, Moran, and Hopkins, and their evidence was to the (ffect that the p'>ny had run at several places, and had been frequently measured, and was always under the height. For the defence Messrs Bonn and Foster testified to having measured the pony on the 16th December. It was then over the 14 hands. Numerous other stewards and officers of the club taatifiod to the place the pony was measured on as being level. The standard waa produced in Court and examined by the Bench, who attostod fo its inaccuracy. Judgment would therefore be for plaintiff, with costs £8 15s. Kowai Road Board v Clarkson ; judgment for 18j 6d. Dillon v Humphreys, claim £7 12«; judgment for 4s 63. Slaughter JiICBNSES. Licenses were granted to George James, 0. D. Fox, and Thos. Hoban, Waikari.