MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2525, 12 May 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHBIBTOHUROH. Fbiday, Mat 12. [Before J, Olliver, 8.M,; R. Weatenra and F. Hobbe, J.P's] Drunkenness. —John Maher, who was found drunk on Oxford terrace the night previous, was finsd £l, or in default fortyeight hours' imprisonment with hard labor. Pbotbction Obdbb.—Minnie Harris applied for an order protecting her earnings against her husband, F. J. Harris, oq the ground of his habitual drunkenness. Mr Slater appeared for the plaintiff, Mr Spaokman for defendant. Plaintiff stated that she had been married for ten years, and that during the last three or four years he had been a very hard drinker, and in that time she had supported herself by dressmaking. Latoly they had been residing in Timaru, where, ten weeks ago, he sold his furniture, saying that he intended to go to England. He did not go, but gave her half the proceeds of the sale, out of which, however, she had to pay a number of debts. She had then about £S left, but that was nearly all the money ha had givon her in three or four years; and, in point of faot, she had nearly supported him. G-eorge Pitts stated that he had known defendant for seven or eight years. For the last three or four years he seemed to have not been able to keep away from drink; ho had been a partner with witness at one time. They were bottlorf, and it used to cost the firm more than their profits to repair oarts which had been damaged through defendant's drunkenness. For the last year he had not seen much of defendant. Defendant denied having neglected to provide for plaintiff, or of having been guilty of habitual drunkenness. He would die for plaintiff, but she had got mixed up with some other women, who had advised her to take this step. He had not touohed a drop of beer for a month, till, on receipt of this summons it upset him completely, and he had exceeded the bounds of temperance. The Bench said that the charge of habitual drunkennets had not been proved, and dismissed the case. Alleqed Fbaud in Bankst/pioy. Nathaniel Vale, wheelwright, of Sandridge, was charged under five several informations with the above offence. Mr O. A. Fisher, coachbuilder, of Sydenham, one of the creditors, had instituted the proof edings under the Fraudulent Debtors Act, 1878. Mr Spaokman appeared for the prosecution, Mr Joyoe for accused. Mr Spaokman said perhaps it would be convenient to hear all the oharges togethor. Their Worahips said this was impossible; the informations must be dealt with separately. Mr Spaokman—" Then I should think it is likely the proceedings will ooeupy about three days, as I have eleven witnesses to call." Accused was then oharged with having, in a statement of his affairs filed in his bankruptcy on Jan. 23rd, 1882, mude a material omission. A. B. Bloxam, Registrar of the Supreme Court, produoed documents filed in this Oourt, boing a declaration by accused of his insolvency and his " four days* statement." Mr Joyce objeoted that the latter dooument was bad on the ground that it had not been verified by affidavit before a solicitor of the Supreme Court, as required by the Dabtors and Creditors Act, 1876, The Banch made a note of the objection. Several other witnesses were examined as to some cartwheels which were alleged to have been sold by aoeueed to the defrauding of his creditors, and the case was still proceeding wbon we went to press.