MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2607, 15 August 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

j i OHEISTOHUBOH. ‘ Tuesday, August 15, , [Before J, Ollivier, Esq., K.M., and B. ; Westenra, Bsq., J.P.] i Dbunkbnnbss. —Michael Keovey for thi i offence was fined 6s. 1 Labcenibs. Lucy Pantin was charge; with several petty larcenoiei, viz , four orangei from the shop of James N fine arrow, on< lemon from the shop of H. Stewart, om half-pint measure from the Golden Age Hotel and one pair of slippers from the shop of M George. The value of the whole was aboul sj. Accused said she did not remember anything about committing the offences, Constable Neele stated ,thot he saw hei take the oranges. He arrested her, and when searched the other things were found on her : she had been drinking. She had never been similarly charged before. The Bench said they thought the woman had stolen the things while in a state of intoxication, and unable to realise what she was doing. She was sentenced to be kept in custody till the rising of the Court. WrrE Desertion. —William Byder, on remand from Dunedin, was charged as above. Main, his brother-in-law, stated that for six weeks the accused had left his wife and five children without any means of support. His wife was now a patient in the Hospital, and the children were dependent on her friends for subsistence. Accused denied the charge, and was remanded till Friday next to admit of further evidence being procured. Neglected Child, Andrew Sajnelski, aged nine, stated to be utterly beyond the control of his stepfather, waa committed to Burnham School until he arrives at the age of fifteen years, to be brought up in the Boman Catholic religion. Civil Cases.—Jackman v Millar, claim £l4 18s sd, for cartage, <Sso. ; Mr MoOonnel for plaintiff, Mr Swann for defendant; judgment for plaintiff with costs. Buck v Paul, claim £ls 16i 8d ; Mr Watson for plaintiff, Mr Stringer for defendant. Plaintiff had been employed to help in the compilation of Wise’s Directory for Chi istchurch district. The work had occupied longer than was calculated upon, and defendant objected to pay plaintiff the amount now claimed as salary. Judgment was for the plaintiff for £lll6s Bd, each party to pay his own costs. Griffen v Knapp, £1 15s 63, balance due on a promissory note; Mr MoConnel appeared for plaintiff] judgment for plaintiff with costs of court and expenses of one witness, 10s. Judgments were for plaintiffs without dispute in Hill v Nott, £1 3s 63, and Knowsley v Craw, £l6. Mullins v Gilburn, claim £3 5s 4d, judgment for plaintiff for 19s 43. Judgments went by default for plaintiffs in Ohy Council v Bell, £4 2s 63; Ulrich v Quaifo, £1 4s 2d; Pepperell v Bure, £l2 Os 6i ; Gaza v Lapham, 13s, and Ulrich v O’Oallaghan, £5 12s 63 ; Fox and Co, v Cameron, Wilkinson v Bower, and Wright v Ogden, were adjourned till August 22ud ; Miller v Jackman, and Jackman v Miller, till August 16th.