MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2536, 25 May 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRIST CHURCH. Thursday, May 25. [Before C. Whitefoord, R.M., and R. Wcatenra, J.P.j Dbunkennbss. —For a first offanoe, a man for being drunk while in charge of a horse and cart was fined 10s. For being drunk a man was fined ss, and another man, who, besides being drunk, had made übo of obsceno language, was fined £1 10j, all with the usual alternatives in default of payment of the fines. LabcsnY. —Wm. Anderson, alias Price, was oharged with stealing a brush valued ss. J. Ola k stated that he kept a stall at the Exhibition. On May 4th prisoner walked past his stall. In consequence of something he heard, witness examined his stock and he missed a hair brush. Witness followed prisoner and saw the handle of the brush now produced sticking out of his pocket. When witness spoke about it prisonor made eff Witness then told a oonstable who arrested prisoner. [Prisoner here said he pleaded guilty] On the application of Sergeant Mason, sentenoe was deferred until certsin charges of burglary ponding against the prisoner had been gone iato ata future day. Assault. charged on information with assaulting John Wilson, did rot appear, and on the application of Mr Slater, who appeared for the plaintiff, warrants were ordered to issue, returnable on May 26th, for their arrest. the burglaries in high street. Wm. Andersoa, alias Prioo, and Edward Longmore, otherwise Adamß, Elenp, or Eosdale, were then charged with breaking into and stealing from the shop of I. Montague, £27 in cash, a cheque for £2, and a quantity of jewellery valued at £6B 6j Bd. Also, with brosking into and stealing from the shop of H. Wilkinson three pairs of boots, valued at £3. Also with breaking into and stealing from the shop of H. Lake postage stamps of the value of 10s, two shillings' worth of copper coin*, and thirty-six aluminium penoil cases, valued at £4, Tho whole of the robberies had been oommitted on the night between April 21st and 22ad. Bergeant Mason said that the police had found the above articles of jewellery, &0., which had been secreted in the Riccarton bush, while searching for a man who had shot at Mr Deans. The police had certain evidence connecting the prisoners with the burglaries, but did not wish to proceed until the man who had been seen lurking about the bush had been arrested. He therefore asked for further remand of eight days. Anderson, on the oharge of stealing a brush, and Longmore, on a charge of vagranoy, had already been remanded from May 17th. The remand was granted till June Ist. Tho prisoners were then removed. LYTTELTON. Thursday, Mat 25. [Before John Ollivier, Esq , R.M.] Drunkenness. —A man named Nelson, barque Closeburn, was proved to have been helplessly drunk, but not so far gone as to be unable to make use of a good deal of bad language, He was fined l't. A first off ender was discharged with a oaution. Cruely to a Dog.—Peter Duncan was charged with ill-treating a dog. T. Wright deposed that on the 17th he saw defendant under tho influence of drink, and he was beating a dog very severely, and pulled a handful of hair off the animal's ears. J. R, Webb testified that defendant was trying to make the dog shake hands, and because it refused, he kicked i% Tho witio s did not think defendant would have done it had he not been excited with liquor. He had known Mr Duncan some years, and knew him to be a respectable man. The Bench fined him 20s. Shipping Case.—W. Harris v Union Steamship Company, claim £3O, damage for delay in transporting goods from Melbourne to Lyttelton. Mr J. S. Williams for plaintiff, Mr H. N. Nalder for defendant. _ Mr R. Pufietr, agent for the Union Steamship Company, said the bill of lading showed that the Orient Company and Union Company undertook jointly to oirry fourteon trunks of boots from Londrn to Lyttelton. Tho Orient steamer Chim' or;zD arrived at Melbourne on tho 2nd of ftlarob, and the Te Anau, into which vessel the goods were transhipped, arrived at Port Chalmers on March 13th. They were landed there, and wero not forwarded from Port Chalmers until the 6th of April, and were delivored to plaintiff on the 7th of April. The ordinary time for carrying goads from Melbourne to Lyttelton was ten day a, but in this instance five weeks elapsed. The bill of lading was not presented to the agent for the Uoion Company until sth April. The bills of lading were made out by the shippers of the goods, and were first made out for goods to bo landed at Port Ohalmors, but were subsequently altered to Port Lyttelton. Three copies wero made out and signed by the master. Two were given to the shippers, and one retained by the master, the "captain's copy." This copy was now producad by the defendants, and it had not been altored as the others, the destination of the goods being left t o Port Chalmers, not Port Lyttelton. W. Harris, the plaintiff, testified that he applied the first week in March to the Union Company, to find whether the goods had arrived. He was told they had not. The goods in question were shipped by the Chimborazo from L ndon, and three other packages were shipped at tho same tinia on board the same steamer, and they reached the defendant in proper time. The loss claimed as damages ho made up by a oharge of 10 per cent, on the value of the goods, they having become urseisonable, in consequence of the delay in delivery, and by the overcharge in tho rate of freight as compared with that oha-ged by sailing vrssel. Mr Nalder contended that plaintiff must bo nonsuited, because he had not shown he was tho holder of the value of the bill of lading. He had Baid in evidence that, because of tho non-delivery of the goods, he had told the Bank manager, through whom the goads wore gent, he would not pay for them unless th(y were delivored. The bill of lading for the goods was not deliverable to tho plaintiff but " to order," and nothing was shown in evidence that Mr Harris had any right to sue upon that bill of lading. Mr Nalder farther excepted to the form of language used in the \ plaint, wherein it was alleged that defendants I agreed to deliver to plaintiff tho goods, wnereaß there was nothing to show that defendants had done anything of tho kind or made any agreement whatover with the present plaintiff. Mr Nalder also drew his Worship's attention to the bill of lading, which was dolivered to the captain—"the captain's copy " —in which it clearly stated tho goods were to bo landed at Port Chalmeis, and that tho defendants had, therefore, carried out their contract. The defendants showed that immediately the plaintiff informed them that the goods were consigned to Lyttelton, and not to Port Chalmers, they had thorn sent on from there to Lyttelton, though the bill of lading they were ooting undt-r was for Port Chalmer*. Mr Williams, for the plaintiff, said that as there was clearly an error in the bill of lading, called the captain's copy, now put in by tbe defendant, and which the plaintiff had had no opportunity of seeing, he must accept nonsuit. So ordered, with oosta for defendants. Another Man's Grog Stopped.—Mrs Durham applied for a prohibitory order to atop publicans in the Lyttelton distriot from supplying her husband, J. Durham, drink. The husband made no objection, ana the order for Lyttelton and Heathcote was granted as asked, to operate for twelve mot-bhs.