MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2552, 13 June 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

OHKISTOHUROH, Tuesday, Junb 13.

[Before J. Ollivier, Esq., R.M., and B. Westenra, Esq., J.P.]

Dbunkbnnkss.—Eliza Wilson, for being drunk, and a? an habitual drunkard, was sent to gaol for three months. Patrick McGuin and two other men were fined 5s each, or in default twenty-four hours' imprisonment with hard labor.

Using Fibeabms.—Thomas Jervis Eyan was oharged under the Vagrant Act with carrying a revolver at night, and under the Public Works Act with discharging the same in a publio road. The first charge was abandoned, as the police were not in a position to prove a felonious assault. It was stated that Sergeant Hughes, hearing a report of a pistol in Montreal street north, gave chase to three men. Ryan wbb captured. He said it was one of two others. Ryan was lot go. From information received, however, Ryan was again arrested on Monday, and admitted the offence. John Haggey, one of the men who had been in company with accused, said that while in conversation about the case of McNevin, who had been committed for shooting, he fired a pistol in the air. Accused stated that he was explaining the working of a self-cocking pistol when it went off accidentally. He habitually carried firearms, and as an ex-trooper deteotivo, &3., was aocustomed to the use of arms. The Benoh thought it possible what accused had said was true. He would, however, bo fined £l. Assault.—F. O. Richardson pleaded guilty to having been drunk. He was also oharged with apaaultinnr Frank Guinness in his own bouse, and with breaking windows, doing damage to the extent of £2. Mr Guinness stated that while in a state of intoxication accuced endeavored to gain admission to the bouse in order to see his wife and ohildreii, who had gone there for protection from his violence. Oa being denied entrance he broke tho windows. Mr Guinness brought a policeman, and on approaching acouoed was attacked by him. Mr Watson, for the prisoner, stated that it all arose from the interference of Mr Guinness, who is his father-in-law, in his affairs. Mr Guinnsss denied having interfered. His daughter fluw to him for protection of hor own free will. Accused was right enough when sober, but quite unbearable when drunk, as of late he had often been. He was fined 5a for being drunk ; ordered to pay £2 for the damage, and to find sureties to keep the peace for six months, himself in £IOO and two sureties in £SO eaoh. Evading an Obdbb —Wm. Mahonoy, a printor, was brought up on warrant charged with having neglected on order of the Ashburton Court to pay 5a for the maintenance of his illegitimate child, and with being suspected of intending to leave tho oolony. Mr Thomas appeared for the prosecution, Mr Watson for the defence. It was proved that no payment had been made, and that he had sold out of a paper at Southbridge, of wbioh he had been part proprietor, and it wa3 commouly reported he intended leaving for Melbourne. Prisoner denied any intention of absconding. He wsb eoeking work at Christchurch, and proceedings had been taken to have the affiliation case ro-heard. He was without mciinß. He wkb ordered to find sureties for obedience to the order, himself in £SO, and two others in £25 each ; in default,

;hr >o months'imprisonmsnt. Lakrikinism. Fred. °S. Hubbard was brought up on remand, charged with breaking a window in Messrs liightband, Allan and Co.'b boot manufactory, Manchester street, on Saturday nii?ht last. Accused had baon remanded to allow of his producing exculpatory evidonce. Porcy Jones, who hhd been called for prisoner, now stated that it was he who threw the stone which brokui the gUsj. D. White reiterated his statement of tho day before, that ha saw Hubbard pick up a stone, and throw it ; he heard the glass brtak immediately. Jones, however, had boon inciting to mischief ithe gang of which he and prisoner were two. The Bench thought prisoner deserved ample punishment, he was need £5, ordered to pay 10s for the damage, and IUJ for tho exponsos of the witness White, or in default one month's imprisonment with hard labor. Civil Cases.— Murphy v Helmore, claim £ls. Mr Button appor.red for plaintiff, and de'rndant for self. It appeared that in May. 1878, ono Pitts purobased half an acre of ground in Oarlloa road, with the intention of ereoting en it a brewery. When this became known, owners of adjacent properties fearing tha nuisance it would create, had a oor.sultation, tho result of which w*s, as plaintiff says, that a number of them, including defendant, agreed to contribute sums of money to pay Pitt a bonus on his purchase, so as to induce him to sell the land. A sum of £45 was thus promised which was to be given to plaintiff, who agreed to purchase and did purchase the seotion. All the subscribers paid up exoept defendant, who, when applied to, sought to saddle bis pay-

ment to plaintiff with a condition till then not suggested. He required plaintiff to exeouto an agreement to keep the neighborhood so far as he could seleot—that is to say, he was not to build small cottages or other objootionable premises on the acquired or any other part of hie property, and, if he so<d it, the contribution of defendant was to be refunded. Plaintiff deolined to make any such engagdnanr. Defendant thtn refused to pay his quota £ls, the amount for the recavory of which the present action was brought. The plaintiff stated that the contribution was solely for the purpose of getting rid of the brewery. J. 8. Guthrie, one of the subscribers, stated that he very distinctly remembered the object of the subscription as agreed amongßt the subscribers, it was substantially as had been stated by plaintiff. Defendant pleaded that he agreed to pay £ls to plaintiff, providing he purchased a large block, including Pitt's land, and undertook to ereot houses of a good oloss, or at least to prevent the ereotion of buildings of an objectionable oharaoter on the whole of it. P. Strouts deposed that he was asked to subscribe to prevent the ereotion of a brewery or other nuisance on Pitt's land. He had deolined to subscribe. Dr. Back gave similar evidence. Judgment was for plaintiff for the amount olaimed, with costs of Court, £1 Is; solicitor's fee, £2 2s; and expenses of one witness, £1 Is. Church Property Trustoes v Burdett and same v Looker were aotions for recovery of promises. Defendants wore ordered to give up possession forthwith. Judgments were for plaintiffs in Maeon, Struthera and Co. v Hamilton, £4. 5s ; Montgomery and Co. v McLaughlin, £9 151 41; Kilburn v Moss, £9 j and Radcliff and Joughin v Tankard, £4 3*. Judgments went by default for plaintiffs in Marks v Scarlett, £l2 15s ; Bridges v Lswler, £1 18s 6i ; "Wagnor v. King, £9 ; Mulligan and Co. v MoMahon, £1 5s 6i ; and Wilkinson v Wakefield, £2 4j lid.