MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2521, 8 May 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

OHRIBTOHUROE. Monday, May 8.

[Before R. Beetbam and F. Guinness, R.M.’e, B. Westenra, J.P.J

Drunkenness.—Albert Harris was fined £X, or in default forty-eight hours imprisonment. Mary Ann Greaves and Moses Churchill were fined 10s each, or in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. For first offences one woman and three men were each fined 5«, or in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. Breaking Lamps on a Hoarding.— Mark Hawkinson, for breaking a lamp on a hoarding on Sunday night, was fined 10s, and ordered to pay 9s. the value of the lamp broken.

Indecency and Resisting Police.—Wm. Lockhart, for indecently exposing himself, and with resisting Constable McCormack, who arrested him at Papanui on Saturday night, a gross case, was sentenced to be imprisoned for seven days. Larceny of Leather. —George Wadsworth, on remand from May 6tb, was charged with stealing a side of leather, valued at 28j, the property of Messrs Holland and Wethey. The case had been postponed for the production of a witness, whose evidence being taken did not alter that given by others on Saturday. The Magistrate said that the Bench had no doubt that prisoner had committed a deliberate theft. He was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment with hard labor. Larceny as a Bailee —Eliza Wilson was charged with the above offence. John Young stated that prisoner had rented two rooms in his cottage, Ferry road. She had the use of certain furniture belonging to witness. After occupying the rooms for some time, she absented herself for ten days Witness, on May Ist, on going to the house found the door open and the following articles were missing :—One table, one chair, two pillows and one gown, all valued at 30s. The goods were afterwards found by witness at the place of a second-hand dealer named Sharpies. Accused stated that Young kept, a brothel; that he had taken money from her, and had given her the furniture in lieu of it. She cross-examined Young at some length, and Sergeant Maa.m said ho now wished to abandon the prosecution. After hearing some evidence from Sharpies, the case was dismissed.

Stealing a Watch. —William Oampbe’l pleaded guilty to stealing a watch, valued at £5, from the person of a man unknown. Sergeant Mason stated that prisoner bad

been seen to take the watch out of the pocket of a man in the Golden Fleece Hotel. The owner of the watch had not been found. Prisoner had been previously convicted six times for similar offences. He was sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labor for sir months.

Licenses for Places op Amusement. — D. Lea and A fred Goslin were charged with having allowed an assembly of people or entertainment to take place in a building in Lichfield street, called the Gymnasium, of which they are the leasees, the same not being licensed for similar purposes by the Corporation, Mme. Lottie Wilmot deposed to having delivered a lecture in the room on (ho night of April 16th, There were about eighty people preentj there was no fee charged for admission, but a collection was taken uo in the room. The licensing officer stated that the building had not been licensed. Alf. Qoslin, one of defendants, deposed that they did not on the occasion referred to let the Hall; they allowed Mme. Wilmot to use it free of charge, and the partners were not aware of having been guilty of a breach of the law. They had not since allowed the Hall to bo used for meetings. The Bench deferred judgment till May 15th. Larcenies —John Smith alias Ki’tenburg, the half wilted and deaf young man, who last week was committed for trial for horsestealing. was charged with having stolen on March 22nd last from the stable of Mr O. Wilson, chemist, Sydenham, a saddle, bridle, and saddle cloth, valued at £5. He was alsocharged with stealing several articles of clothing valued at £2, the property of Robert McKee from the same place and at the same time. There was no deffa.ee, and he was sentenced, to three months’ imprisonment with hard labor on each charge. It was stated that there are several other chargee of a similar kind against the prisoner to be heard at some future time.

Miscellaneous. —Thomas Gray, Henry Knight and Vfm. Peokham were each fined 5» for allowing horses to wander.—Salvatori Lezza, for allowing his chimney to take fire, was fined 5s. —John Wright, for obstructing with a horse and dray a footpath opposite a building going up in Hereford street by backing the dray with a load of bricks on to the path and keeping it there until the load had been discharge 1, was fined ss.—Edward Hancock, for leaving his horse and .vehicle w.tbout control, was fined ss. William Speirs, David Speirs and Archibald Speirs, oirpentors, were charged with neglecting to contribute to the support of their father, James Speirs. Mr Stringer appeared for the defendants, who pleadai that plaintiff had deserted them and their mother for six years, during which time he had sent very little money. Defendants had supported their mothsr, and on the return of their father, which took place some months ago, they gave him a home. He, however, had behaved very badly. He got drunk as often as he could, and they were compelled to turn him out. The Bench said that they had no sympathy with plaintiff, but so long as his sons were able to support him, that charge could not ba thrown on to the State. They would have to pay 6s each weekly, 15s in all.

LTrrsiiTON. Monday, May 8. [Before J. Oilivier, JEsq., B.M.] Civil Cask,—Hildyard v McDonald, claim £26 19i 6i; Mr H. N. Nalder for plaintiff, Mr Joyce for defendant. Plaintiff testified that he supplied to the crew of the ship City of Perth a quantity of boots. The boots were left on board with the steward of the vessel, and the defendant (coaster of the vessel) said to plaintiff they would be all right. A second lot of booto were also delivered to the mate of the ship for some of the crew. The vessel then left for Timaru to load there, the master having previously assured the plaintiff that he would send up the money for the claim. After arriving at Timaru he sent a telegram to plaintiff, saying that if he did not go down to Timaru and take the goods baok be would put them on shore. On the receipt of this telegram plaintiff put the ca-.e in bis solicitor's hands, For the defence it was contended that the master had advertised in the daily papers that he would not be responsible for his crew’s debts unless by his written authority. In three instances the master admitted giving his consent for his men to get boots off plaintiff, but he denied giving authority for any of the others to be supplied. The boots were, however, put on board in a sack just before the vessel left for Timaru, and the defendant saw plaintiff and told him that it the men for whom the boots were went to sea from Timaru in the ship ho would pay for them. After receiving the summons defendant came up fromTimaru and offered plaintiff an order on the agents for the amount of his account, payable on the day the ship would leave Timaru, bub plaintiff declined to accept such order. Defendant said ho did not dispute the account of plaintiff, but he would not pay it|until the ship was ready for sea Counsel for defendant submitted that plaintiff must be nonsuited because he held no written authority from the defendant, as required by the 4th section of the Statute of Frauds in oases of guarantee. Mr Nalder contended that, as the goods were not supplied to the crew but to the master,.now the defendant, the Statute of Frauds quoted did not apply. The Bench gave judgment for plaintiff with costs.