MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2248, 16 June 1881, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH.

Wednesday, Junk 15. (Before Nugint Wood, Esq., B-M.) ' Civil Oases. —Raine v Lloyd, £l3 2b sd. Mr Holmes for plaintiff, Mr Stringer for defendant. This was a claim for board and lodging and sundry articles supplied to defendant. Defendant had lodged a set off for cash paid and music lessons given to the children of plaintiff, amounting to £l4_ ss. After hearing evidence, judgment was given for plaintiff for £ll 2s sd, costs of Court, solicitor’s fee £2 2s, and expenses of witnesses 15s. Joblin v Chapman, £ls. Mr Holmes for plaintiff, Mr Stringer for defendant. Plaintiff stated that he rented from defendant a cottage with two paddocks attached at 12s per week. After some months’ occupation he gave notice of his intention to leave, when defendant put in an extra claim for 4s a week, rent for one of the paddocks, which plaintiff refused, thence came the execution, and the present action for money paid on it and for damages on account of having the bailiffs in the house for two days. The Magistrate thought the evidence showed that the rent claimed for the paddock was the result of afterthought. Judgment for plaintiff for full amount, with costs of Court, professional fee £2 2s, and expenses of one witness 10s.—Aynsley v Pope, claim for the price of a horse, £SB 18s 6d. Mr Gresaon for plaintiff, Mr Joynt for defendant, Ttais was a collision case. Plaintiff, as ho said, was riding slowly, ih company with two others, down Lincoln road on their proper side on May 21st about midday, when defendant, who was driving a spring cart in the opposite direction, ran into him. His horse was so injured as to have died the next day. Defendant was going ten or twelve miles an hour, and at tho time of the collision he had pulled over towards plaintiff, so as to pass another cart which was in tho centre of the road, but there was plenty of room for him to pass between if he had driven carefully. Plaintiff himself was close to the footpath, and could not get out of the way. Ho found tho cartwheel marks afterwards within 4ft of the footpath. G. O. Connel, one of plaintiff’s companions, corroborated the above evidence, adding that tho horse was worth fifty guineas, and that defendant was driving at the rate of sixteen miles an hour. There were four persons in the cart. Edward Oliesold, the other rider, gure evidence which was of no consequence. He said there was another cart on the road besides that of defendant, but he could not say where it was, or if it had anything to do with the collision. The three agreed in stating that defendant when charging plaintiff gave a- loud yell, for what reason they could not tell. J. Kimbell, called as an expert, stated as his opinion that tho horse was quite worth fifty guineas. Ho was a very fine weight-carrying hunter. J. Hill, veterinary surgeon, deposed as to the injuries tho horse had received. The shaft ot the cart had penetrated by the pelvis to tho lumbar regions. He died of internal hemorrhage. The defendant, Alex. Pope, deposed that when the collision occurred, he was on the crown of the road, after having passed another cart. The three previous witnesses had been on their wrong side, and apparently to get out of tho way of the other cart, they drew over to their proper side of the road. In doing so, two of them crossed clear, but plaintiff hesitated, and the horse he was riding was impaled by the shaft of the cart. When defendant saw that an accident must occur he pulled up as well as he could. The shaft of the cart was broken, and all in the cart were thrown out. After picking himself up ho and one of his mates noted particularly tho wheel marks. Ho found by them that the cart was, if anything, on the near side of the crown of tho road. Plaintiff was walking his horse. P. A. Pope and Henry Mather, who were in the cart, corroborated exactly the above evidence. Augustus Schultz spoke to finding at the place described by Pope, senior, the wheel tracks. He differed from them as to the pace of the horse that was killed ; he said it was going at a sharp trot. R. Collier deposed to seeing three men riding on the wrong side of Lincoln road a few minutes before the time at which both parties agreed that the accident took place. Ho knew Pope’s horse, and was sure it could not be driven at anything beyond a slow pace. After heating counsel on both sides, his Worship said he would defer judgment until the next day. Judgment was for plaintiffs in—Standard Brewery Company v Sevan, £2 Bs, and Walla v Blyth, £l3 6s. Judgments went by default, with costs, for plaintiffs in—Latter v McFadden, £1 12s Id ; same v King, £2 17s 3d ; Thomas v Crabtree, £57 9s 2d; Hawken v Crabtree, £4 4s j Marks v Foley, £lO 10s ; Taylor v Howard, £6 5s 6d ; Kelsey and Co. v Kimbell and Sharp, £l3 12s 5d ; Yoisard v Hathaway, £2 15s ; same v Pullar, £2 7s ; and Peart v Foster, 7s. Latter v Dunn and Tippings, Charters and 00. v Windsor were adjourned till June 22nd.

Thhebdat, JtJNB 16. (Before O. Whitefoord, Esq., R.M.) Dbuneenness. —James F. La Sueur was fined 5s for being drunk and disorderly, 20s for assaulting the arresting constable, and ordered to pay 2s for cab hire. James Brown was fined 20s ; Philip Parker was fined 5s ; and for a first offence a man was fined 5s ; all with the customary alternatives. Labceny.— Dan Ryan, John Ray, and Thomas Milne were charged with stealing a jar containing five gallons of port wine, the property of the licensee of the Queen’s Hotel. Prisoners had besn found very drunk in an empty house at tho corner of Lichfield and Madras streets. There was an empty jar found with them. They were taken to the lockup, and the jar was afterwards identified as being the ono stolen from the hotel. Prisoners pleaded guilty. They were sentenced to three months’ imprisonment with hard labor. Embezzlement. Patrick Dunn was brought up charged with appropriating to his own use the proceeds of a cheque for £52 15s, given to him by his master, John Cassin, contractor, of Lincoln. Prosecutor stated that he had on June 9th given prisoner tho cheque above named on the Union Bank. Ha told prisoner to go to Ohristchurch and get it cashed. Prisoner went to town by the morning train, but not returning as ordered, prosecutor came to Christchurch the same night in search of him, and on the following morning took out a warrant. Ho found that the cheque had been' cashed. Prisoner had no authority to appropriate any part of the proceeds of the cheque. In answer to prisoner, witness said he owed prisoner, about £lO, but had received from him an account for £26. On that account he had paid prisoner £ls. He had borrowed £l4 from prisoner, but had for that a contra account which covered it. Some of it was for tucker, bills for which had been paid without prisoner’s authority. To the Bench—Prisoner had been employed by prosecutor since May 6th as carter, at 25a per week and found. Thos. Fraser Bowman, teller at the Union Bank, Ohristchurch, proved that the cheque had been cashed by him at that Bank on June oth in the forenoon. He did not recognise the prisoner as tho presenter, although ho had required the endorsement which it now boro —that of the prisoner’s name. Jes. Weatherly, constable stationed at Lincoln, stated that he arrested prisoner on the present charge at the Perthshire Arms, Lincoln, at 4 p.m. of the 11th instant. Prisoner, drawing out of his pocket a bundle of notes, said be had tho money. He further said the greater part of the money was his, and he intended to keep it. Ho had heard that there was a warrant out for him in Ohristchurch, and thought he had better go up to Lincoln and square it with Oaaain. When searched' there was £39 8s 9d on him. The constable told him that he must have spent a lot of money. He replied that he had given £3 10s to take his watch out of pawn, the rest had been spent in drinking about. Prisoner made a statement to the effect that he had no intern

tion of cheating Oassin out of his money. Ho was then fully committed for trial at the next criminal sessions of the Supreme Court to be held at Christchurch. Bail was asked for, and allowed in two sureties of £IOO each.

LYTTELTON. Wednesday, June 15. [Before Joseph Beswick, Esq., R.M.J Undefended Oases —Queereo v Newton, claim £6 5s '6d ; Maher v Do Blois, claim £2 6a lOd, Mr Nalder for plaintiff. Judgment given in each case by default. Civil. Cask. —Captain Hayes,master of the schooner Maud Graham, appeared as plaintiff in a suit to recover possession of furniture and effects valued at £45, defendant, with his mother-in-law, Mrs Campbell, in 1878. Mr Nalder appeared for the captain, and Mr Spackman for the defendant Campbell, Claim was also made by the plaintiff for the expenses he had been put to in consequence of the

detention of the goods in dispute, A large amount of evidence was taken, the plaintiff alleging that in 1878 his wife died at his mother-in-law’s house, to which the furniture belonging to plaintiff had been removed. (The case was previously brought by the plaintiff, who was nonsuited because he failed to itemise the furniture he claimed for.) _He had since visited the house from time to time, but at no time did he give the furniture to his mother-in-law as compensation for the nursing she did during his wife’s (her daughter's) fatal illness. He claimed he had paid her for all she did by making certain presents to her, and in part cash, Messrs Bruce and Seager were called to prove that tho former had offered to store the plaintiff’s furniture, while the latter had made an offer to purchase it from plaintiff. The evidence of the father-in-law, Campbell, and of his wife was directly contradictory to that of the plaintiff’s, both witnesses declaring positively that no other recompense was made by tho plaintiff to his mother-in-law for her services to her deceased married daughter and to the plaintiff himself than the present plaintiff made of the furniture, and that he made that present they both stoutly affirmed. They called Mrs Thickens, a neighbor, to prove that last year when the plaintiff was at their house she offered to buy from him the fonder, an article the possession of which he now sought to recover, but that he told her to sp?ak to Mrs Campbell; hehal nothing to do with the things. .Plaintiff, in his statement to tho Court under cross examination, had denied having made any such remark (o Mrs Thickens, or Mrs Thickens to him. The Bench treated her, however, as an impartial and independent witness, and gave judgment for the defendant, with costs of Court and counsel's fee £3 3s.