MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2626, 6 September 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

OHEISTOHUROH. Wednesday, Sbptbmbeb 6.

[Before B. Westenra and J. B, Parker, Esqs., J.P’«.]

Dbunkennesb. —The following cases were dealt with:—Mary Ann Greaves was fined £1 or forty-eight hours’ imprisonment; James Edwards 10s or twenty-four hours’ imprisonment; John Boyle and Abraham Simmons, who, besides being drunk, had assaulted Sergeant Brooks when he ordered them to “ move on” in Colombo street on the previous night, were fined each £1 for the assault, or in default three days’ imprisonment. George H. Pannel and Joseph Barnes, who had been found asleep drunk on Tuesday night on the back premises of E. H. Banks, St, Asaph street, were cautioned and discharged, a conviction being entered up against them. Illegally on Pbemisbs. —Thomas Hardy, on remand from the sth instant, pleaded guilty to having been found asleep by night on a red sheepskin carriage rug within a porch on Dr, Deamer’s premises, in Armagh street, on tbs night of September 4th. He was also charged with stealing the rug abovenamed, which has not yet been claimed. Sergeant Mason stated that the prisoner was well known as a thief. The charge of being illegally on premises was dismissed, and on the other charge the prisoner was remanded till September Bth. Petty Theft. Thomas Lawson was charged with stealing from the Oity Hotel one pint measure, one gill measure, one drinking glass, and one corkscrew, valued together at £1 15s. He pleaded guilty, saying that he had taken the things while in a drunken stele for a “ lark.” There being nothing known of the prisoner, and the evidence giving some color to his tale, be was discharged, after being severely cautioned. Civil Oases —Walker v Rhodet, claim £1 6s 6d, for rent and damage to fittings of a cottage. Judgment for plaintiff for 13a and costs. DuncanondOotterillvßatley,claim £6, fees for preparing a lease Hamilton to Batley. Mr Martin appeared for plaintiffs, Mr Stringer for defendant. Defendant had refused to sign the lease, and plaintiffs holding that by special agreement defendant had agreed to pay for the drawing, now sued for payment for work done. Defendant denied either having given instructions to plaintiffs to draw the lease or having given instructions to plaintiffs. Plaintiffs were nonsuited, with costs. Several oases were postponed on account of the absence of a Resident Magistrate.