MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2690, 21 November 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHEISTCHUECH. Tuesday, November 21

[Before J. Ollivier, Esq., E.M., and E. Westenra, Esq., J.P.j Drunkenness. —Henry Campbell was fine ! ss, or, in default, twenty-four hours’ imprisonment with hard labor. Protection Orders. —Charlotte Sirett applied for a separate maintenance on account of the cruelty of her husband. As there seemed a chance of the difference between the parties being adjusted, the case was postponed for four weeks. An order was made protecting the earnings of Martha Yates from her husband John Yates. She was also given charge of her three children, and defendant was ordered to pay .£1 per week for their maintenance. Cross summonses between the parties for assault and abusive language were withdrawn.

Civil. Cases. —King v Murphy, claim £6 IGs for two weeks’ lodging for the wife and children of defendant. Mr Stringer for plaintiff, Mr McConnell for defendant. Mrs Murphy, called for plaintiff, swore that her husband had repeatedly illused her, and finally put her out. She went to •one or two places to live till her money was exhausted, and then got credit at King’s. The bill run up there her husband refused to pay, and the present action was brought. Defendant pleaded that Mrs Murphy had left her home of her own accord, and that he had warned plaintiff not to give her credit. Judgment was for plaintiff for the amount claimed with costs, and solicitor’s fee £1 Is. Avon Eoad Board v Goodland, claim £3 9s 4d for rates. Mr Joynt appeared for the Eoad Board. Mr Goodland stated that his counsel, Mr Harppr, from some reason was unable to attend. He asked for an adjournment. Mr Joynt opposed the application. He explained the claim to be one arising from steps taken to re-arrange the boundaries of the Borough of St. Albans, the Eiccarton, and Avon Eoad Boards. Proper steps for the purpose had been taken by the xatc payors, and the Governor had issued a proclamation, but the boundaries defined therein were palpably and absurdly in error. On this being ascertained, the chairmen of the bodies concerned had requested the Government to correct the errors. The Colonial Secretary, however, replied that the alterations wore so great that proceedings in the matter would have all to he begun anew. Those proceedings bad not been begun, and the raterolls were compiled on the old lines. Defendant and others held that the proclamation bad cut off his district from the control of the Avon Eoad Board, which had nevertheless rated him. Mr Joynt further said if defendant was successful the objectors would be exempt from all rating this year, and there being no legal authority, a complete state of anarchy —so far as local government was concerned —would ensue. He pressed for the case to be gone on with. Mr Goodman having admitted that the facts were as stated by Mr Joynt, the only difference being their views about the validity of the proclamation, .Mr Ollivier said he was decidedly of opinion that the proclamation was null. Ho gave judgment for the amount claimed, with costs. Execution would be stayed for a week to allow of Mr Harper applying for a rehearing, if he was so advised. Judgments wont for plaintiffs by default in Eountrce and Co. v Compton, £G 3s Sd ; City Council v Eodda, £2 -Is 8d ; Doyle v Ward, £5 l"s fid ; Hopper v Todd, £2 8s 6d; Same v Heywood, 13s 9d ; Ellis v Eeed, £1 3s 7d ; Horner v Jarrett, £1 14s Gd ; and Leach v Hill, £3 ss. Bassett v Lee was adjourned till November 2Sth.