RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Grey River Argus, Issue 57, 24 May 1866, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

GREYMOUTH. Tuesday, 22nd May, ISGG, (Before W. H. Revell, Esq., R.M.) There were no police cases before the Court this morning. CIVIL CASES. GK F, Maxwell *v. Reuben Waite.— Claim of L2p^*The defendant did not appear, and judgment was given by default for the amoiSW claimed and costs. R. Donovan v. J. Sheldin.—- Claim of LB, the balance of wages due. The plaintiff, a tinsmith, claimed wages at the rate of LI per day, and he'produccd a witness to prove that thisswas the .usual rate paid in town. The defendant's case was that he made no aiTangementf'with the plaintiff for the payment of any specific amount, and.he thought that the rate at which he had paid Mm (L 4 10s v per week) was a fair wage. The Magistrate gave judgment for the amount claimed and costs. F. Hamilton v. W. J. Watts and Co. -^ Claim of L 8 6s fid for goods sold and de* livered. Judgment by default with costs; Edward Gallagher v. White. — The parties did not appear, and the case was struck out. Macleau, Fisher and Co. v. Henry Philips. — Dismissed for non-appearance. v W. J. Watts and Co. v. Trask.— No appearance ; dismissed. . . J. and E. Paul v. J. M. Thompson. — Claim of LI 5 2s 6d, for goods sold and delivered; The debt was admitted, and judgment was given for the amount claimed and costs. ;

Wednesday, 23rd May. (Before W. H. Revell, Esq,, R.M.) OBSTRUCTING THE THOROUGHFARE, — Joseph Kilgour was charged with having obstructed the thoroughfare in, Mawhora Quay by placing a notice-board thereon on the 18th mst. The defendant did not appear, and the constable stated that a large boai'd was placed on the footpath in front of the defendant's hotel, containing a theatrical announcement, which projected about liwo feet on to the pathway. A line of LI was inflicted.— John Taylor was charged with a similar offence by placing an empty box and ■ several.packages on the footpath in Mawhera Quay, on the 18th inst. The defendant, who did not appear, was paid L 2, as it was stated by the constable that he had previously been, cautioned for a simiLar offence. At a later stage of the proceedings the . defendant appeared, and the Magistrate remitted the penalty to 10s, as the. defendant had not previously been cautioned. Jane Robertson v. William Worrell. — Dismissed for non-appearance. , WARDEN'S COURT. A Disorderly House.— Thomas Inglitt, of the' Oddfellow's Arms Hotel, was charged on the information of Constable Boyle with having permitted disorderly conduct in his licensed house on the morning of the 18th inst. The infoimant said — On the morning of the ISth inst the defendant had permission to keep the house open until three o'clock, for the purupaftof giving a ball. A fgplfelSSe^past three o'clock I went into the house and told the defendant that his permission had expired, as the dancing was still going on. Again at four o'clock, as I was passing the house I heard a noise as Of a lot of persons quarrelling and fighting, and on going into the ballroom I found it full, and two men just preparing to fight. There was a number of drunk 'men in the room, and the defendant was standing amongst them looking on quietly. The whole house, including the"bar, was lit up. Cross-examined by the defendant : WHen I told you the time was up I saw you go into the ballroom, but did not see you persuade anyone to leave the house. You did-,, not call upon me to help you to clear the : house. When the house was cleared, I had a glass at the bar, but I cannot say who paid for it. . ."■■..... William Lambert, a night watchman at an adjoining hotel, who had his attention drawn to the disturbance taking place in the Oddfellow's Arms Hotel, : and who entered the house, corroborated the constable's evidence. For the defence the defendant said— When I was reminded by the police that it was time .to close. I went into the ballroom and stopped the music. An altercation took place between two men, and I reminded them that it was time to leave thejhouse. -They would not listen to me, but commenced to fight. As they were very violent, ■ and I could do nothing to quiet them, I went to the bar, where constable Boyle was standings and asked him to help me to clear the house. The constable went into the room, but did nothing. ■ I persuaded the men one by one to leave the .house, and when it w : as closed the constable had a drhik with me at the bar. Gustave Hart, a musician : I,re.nxember being told by the defendant to stop the music before it was quite three o'clock in. the morning. There were rows and figths going on between drunken m.en, and the defendaut was unable to quieten ther^ I heard, the

defendant call upon the constable to assist him to 'clear, the room, and the constable vtried to 'do it, but could not. John" O'Connel, another musician, and j ;Heury Lester, a carpenter, gave simijjjj] . evidence. ■■ I^^? The Magistrate : It appears to me fronvtlie-r evidence of your own witnesses, that between the hours' of three and four o'clock on the morning of the 18th, your house was open, and there was a good deal of fighting and. quarrelling, going on in it. Although permission was granted for you to keep open for the purpose of giving .a ball, it was not granted for the purpose of permitting persons to get intoxicated, and to behave in a riotous manner. If you cannot conduct your house in a quiet and orderly manner you will have your license taken from you. I also warn you, by your own evidence, you have shown ' that you have made yourself liable to a further penalty of £20 for supplying a constable with liquor while on duty. In this case I inflict a tine of £5, and will be more cautious in future in granting you permission to keep your house open after the ordinary hour. The Magistrate further instructed the Inspector of Police that if any case of the kind occurred again, to have an information laid against the publican who supplied a constable with liquor while on duty. Jumping a Claim. —A Caution to Miners. — John A. Badcock and party v. Jack Falconer and party.— The defendants did not appear. The plaintiffs' case was that about two months ago they (a party of four) took up a claim on .the- South, Beach, on the first terrace behind the Red, White, and Blue Store. They had worked out a portion of it. when the defendants came in and measured the plaintiffs ground, after which they said they were satisfied. But on the following morning (the 17th instant), the defendants moved their pegs, took possession of nearly half of the plaintiffs' > ground, and would not leave off working it until they were restrained by the Warden's order. The ; four plaintiffs' were called into .Court, and s their miners rights examined. They were all dated on the ISth instant, arid they said that the summons was taken out on the 1 7th : instant, but the Clerk of the Conrt^^idjt, _ was on the 18th. rjz The Warden said to the plaintiffs : It appears by your rights that you had no right or title to be on the gold fields until the 18th instant.. This party (the defendants) has taken up your ground before you took out, your rights, or had any title to lay an information against them. You have been working on that ground for the past two months without miners' rights. The Government of this Province does not. send round men to see if the miners take put then* rights ; but when a case such as this comes before me it is my duty to see that the penalties are inflicted. Ishall dismiss this case, and shall further fine you L 2 each for working without miners' rights. If you cannot pay the fine, I shall send you to prison. (The fines were paid..}