MAGISTERIAL

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2390, 30 November 1881, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL

OHBISTOHUEOH. Wednesday, November 30. [Before G. L. Mellish, Esq , R.M.]

Drunkenness.—Mary Mitchell was fined ss, and ordered to pay Is cabhire. A youth, aged about seventeen, was brought up charged with being drunk on the previous evening. Mr Mellish enquired if tho boy had any parents hero. Prisoner replied that he had parents in tho colony. The Magistrate said he thought the most fitting punishment for him would be a good flogging administered by his father. After a severe reprimand accused was fined ss, and ordered to pay Is oabhire. For a first offence a woman was fined ss. Stealing Flowbkb.—Alfred Burmeister, a boy aged ten years, pleaded guilty to stealing flowers from the garden of John Billings on the 26th inst. Tho police raid his mother had left the province, bis father was also temporarily absent. The boy travelled about from one brothel to another, and was seen about the streets at all hours of nights, being apparently quite uccared for. The Magistrate said he thought tho beat thing for the boy would be to send him to the Industrial School, so that he might be away from his present evil associates. Committed accordingly to Burnham for two years, to be brought up in the religion of the Church of England. Alleged Arson. Bridget Payne was brought up charged with having wilfully set fire to a house, the property of John Heslop, in Barbadoes street. Mr Spaokman appeared for accused. Sergeant Pratt said tho arrest had only taken place at 7 p. ro. tho previous day, and he asked for a remand until Friday next, which was granted. Mr Spaokman applied for bail. His Worship said he would accept two sureties in £IOO each. Charge op Horbb Stealing. J. W. Crabtree was brought up charged with having stolen from John Holt a horse valued at £ls. On tho application of the police accused was remanded till Friday next, bail being allowed, himself in £IOO, and two sureties in £SO each.

Civil Casks.—Patterson v Bayne, £2 19s. Mr Spaokman appeared for defendant, and produced a receipt for the money. Plaintiff said it had evidently been given without his knowledge by a person who had since left his service. Judgment for defendant, with costs, travelling expenses 18s, and solicitor’s fee £1 Is. —Saxton v Bowden ; his Worship gave judgment in this case, which had been heard some time ago ; judgment for plaintiff for £7 10s, expenses of four witnesses £1 15s 6d, and solicitor’s fee £1 Is. Judgments went for plaintiffs by default in Galletly v Welsh, 14s 9d j Everett Bros, v Oollinson, 13s 6i ; Rawson v Mason, £2 12s; and Delamain v Walker, £53. Hubbard v Upton was adjourned till December 7th. BANGIORA. Tuesday, November 29th. [Before O. Whitefoord, Esq., R.M, ; A. H. Cunningham and J. Johnston, Esq.] Railway By-Laws.—J. J. Doyle was charged with travelling on a branch line of railway between Oxford and Bangiora, using a ticket partly expired, and which had been transferred from one J. Daly. Mr Perceval appeared for the prosecution. Accused admitted the offence. He had been in charge of a drapery store at Oxford, and was relieved by Daly, who handed to him the unexpired portion of his return ticket. When question at tho time by the guard, he admitted the ticket had been transferred. Mr Perceval asked for the infliction of a prohibitive penalty, and if it was severe on accused, the railway authorities, on application, might remit any portion of it. The Bench, adverting to a statement made by accused that he was ignorant of the law, and that as Mulligan and Co. with whom he was then employed, would have to pay his fare, it was no interest to him, they would inflict a lighter penalty than otherwise. Fined 20s.

Civil Oabhb.—Laxton Bros, v J. Wheeler, £22 Is 95, set-off £2l 15a Bd. Mr Gresson for plaintiff, Mr Spaokman for defendant. The principal part of the oaae was in reference to the sale of eleven sheep, which defendant alleged had been made to plaintiff. As no direct evidence of this transaction was forthcoming judgment was given for plaintiff for £7 2i Bd. J. Bunting vW. Gorrie, £3 7s 6d ; Mr Greseon for defendant; judgment for defendant for £2 2a 6d, paid into Court. Bangiora Drainage Board vJ. Egan, £2 12s 6d, Defendant contended there was no Board and no law to back it. Mr Chapman, the collector, put in documentary evidence of the contrary, and judgment was given for plaintiff. J, Free v J. Highwood, £6 5s ; judgment for plaintiff. The Adjourned Medical Case.—ln the cane of W. Weir v O. de L. MaoOarthy, claim £2O for damage and professional attendance for plaintiff’s daughter, the Besident Magistrate gave judgment. In this case at a previous sitting the Magistrates, the Resident Magistrate being absent, gave judgment for plaintiff for £5, and upon appeal it was decided by his Honor Mr Justice Johnston, that the whole case should be heard before a Resident Magistrate. Mr Whitefoord reviewed the evidence, which was to the effect that the girl having accidently broken her thigh was attended by defendant, at that time a doctor practising in the district, who it was alleged did not set the limb properly or give it proper attention, and a second medical man had to reset it. The claim included £lO for damages and £lO for Dr. Ovenden’s attendance. He said the question before him was whether the father of the girl had sustained the damage as set out, whether the expenses were caused by defendant’s neglect, whether the parents had not properly followed the defendant’s instructions, and whether the bed on which the patient was placed was a proper one to assist in bringing about a cure. The cases quoted by learned counsel for the defence, referring to railway accidents, he would hold did not apply, as in those case* it did not appear that there was any wrongful act on the part of the company which entitled the parent to recover in respect of damage by the injury of a child. In this case the plaintiff alleged that the child had been unskilfully treated, so that recovery was delayed, and permanent injury to the child was likely to result; he claimed for loss of time for nursing, and the extra expense he was also put to for the services of another doctor. Looking over the evidence it was plain that Dr MaoOarthy had been negligent. He detailed the visits he had paid to his patient, and yet when informed on removing the splints and placing on a starch bandage that the injured leg was shorter than the other, ha appeared to have taken no notice of it, and Dr. Ovenden was sent for. Eleven days after defendant took Dr. Meikle to see the limb, aud his evidence was to the effect that the treatment had not been what it ought to have been. As to the bed not being a proper one as alleged by defendant, Dr. Ovenden effected a cure on the same bed, and by re-setting the bone the injured limb was brought to the same length as the other. Dr. MaoOarthy could not have attended as stated without noticing that the limb was short, especially as bis attention was called to the fact, and the plaintiff was entitled to recover for the wrongful and negligent act, as well for the medical attendance as for the extra trouble to which ho was put, and the sum set down seemed a fair and reasonable one. Judgment for plaintiff for £2O, Court fees, witnesses, and professional fee. Mr Spackman said he would give notice of appeal, in case the defendant, with whom he would communicate, might elect to take the matter further.