MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LVI, Issue 6491, 16 December 1881, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

OHEISTOHUBOH. Thtjbbdat, Dm. 15. (Before G. L. Hellish, Hsq,, 8.M.) Dbunzenness.—A man, not previously convicted of drunkenness, woe fined ss, and ordered to paj cab hire, Is, for being drank on the South town belt on the day previous. SMBBZZXiEMBNT. John Symington was charged with embezzling the enm of 2s, the property of Caleb James Lee, on Deo. 12. In answer to the question as to whether or not he admitted the offence, the prisoner said he admitted receiving the 2s and not paying the amount over to his master. Sergeant Pratt said the prosecutor was not present, and as the accused had only been arrested about 9 o’clock on the night before, he applied for a remand. His Worship remanded the prisoner to Saturday next. cmL cases. Fasmbb t. Sandfobd and Sandfoad.— Claim, £25, for damages for assault. Mr Gresson for plaintiff; Mr Stringer for defendant. This case had been adjourned from the previous day to secure the evidence of a medical witness. Dr W. H. Ovenden said that he had been attending the plaintiff, Farmer, about six weeks ago. He had bruises on the sido of the head, the right knee, and over the kidneys. Witness had attended about a fortnight or three weeks. The bruise on the loins gave rise to a very deep-seated pain, and would incapacitate the plaintiff from stooping for some time. To Mr Stringer: The bruise on the loins might have been caused by a fall on a rail or by a blow. Counsel having addressed the Bench, his Worship thought the case would be fairly met by allowing the plaintiff at the rate of 6s per day for the three weeks he had been unable to work, £5 Bs, with costs, witnesses* expenses, and solicitor’s fee, £5 18s. MisoelliAKEOlts. —Judgment was given for plaintiff by default in the cases of Duncan v. Bckberg, claim £lO 8s lOd; same v. Camoross, £l9 9s; Sheppard v. Davis, claim £4 10s; same v. Thiel, claim 10s; Bussell v. Johnston, claim £3 15s; Terrell v. Pleated, claim £6; Bhodes v. Wiseman, claim £lo. The cases of Sherrin v. Sullivan, and Peart v. Duller, were adjourned to Deo. 21.—Lipsham v. Preston, claim 9s 6d for painting two doors m defendant's house, labour and material. Defendant asserted that the plaintiff had only been working as an employee of Mr Godfrey, who was painting his house, and whose claim had been paid. His Worship gave judgment for 6s, value of paint supplied by plaintiff.—Webb v. Jebsen and Atkinson nfaim £3 18s for railway carriage of grass seed purchased from defendant, and interest. Plaintiff said it had been agreed at the time of purchase that the amount of railway op riage should be deducted from the price agreed upon for the grass seed, but by an oversight this had not been done at the lime the defendant's account was paid. Defendant had no clear recollection of the bargain made, but would not deny plaintiff's statement Judgment for plaintiff for £8 Bs, being the amount of railway freight lets the interest, which was disallowed. TbuxbbiiL t. Donovan. —Claim, £6 10s, value of a pigeon house and one week’s rent of cottage. Mr Holmes for defendant Plaintiff said ho had bought a property from defendant, who, after the purchase was concluded, had removed a pigeon house valued by him at £5. Defendant had subsequently rented a house from plaintiff, and had left leaving a week’s rent unpaid. Defendant said that he had expressly stipulated with Elaintiff when ho sold him the propertv that e (defendant) was to be allowed to take the pigeon house in exchange for two Hamburg fowls, which plaintiff had taken possession of, and afterwards sent back as being dissatisfied with his bargain. With regard to the claim for rent defendant said ho had taken a house from plaintiff at 10s per week, but at the end of the first week the rent had been raised to £1 per week, when he considered plaintiff had broken his agreement, and left the house. His Worship said he was satisfied that plaintiff bad agreed to accept the fowls in lieu of the pigeon house, therefore the amount of £5 would be disallowed. He was, however, entitled to his rent, and judgment was given for 10s and costs.

AMBBBLBT. Thcbbdat, Duo. 16. (Before 0. Whitofoord, Hsq., 8.11., A. Broadfoot, W. 0. Feudal!, and T. Douglas, Esq#.) Civil Oabks.—A. Greig t. Brooke, claim 8* for refund of money paid for admimon to an entertainment given bj defendant and a number of young persons, calling them■elvea the Amberley Christy Minstrels, in aid of the district eohool prise fund. Mr Greig laid bo sued for the sum of Bs, being the amount that the members of hie family had paid for admission to the entertainment, which they would not have gone to, except for the sake of supporting the prise fund. He explained that the troupe had played, and that the receipts for the entertainment were, according to the defendant's letter put in, stated to bo £8 IDs, but the troupe had chosen to pay off some of their back debts with the proceeds, and had left only Bs, which had been sent to the Chairman of the School Committee. The defendant's son proved to the payment of the money to defendant at the door, and the Oh airman of the School Committee deposed to the offer made in writing by defendant of the nett proceeds of the entertainment for the childrens prise fund. Mr Greig did not wish to prsis the case. The letter making the offer, and the balancesheet of the entertainment, were put in. The Secretary to the Town Hall Company stated ah application had been made to him for a reduction of the rent of the HalL The defence wee that (be Secretary and Treasurer to the

troupe hod written thie offer, but afterward* they found that their expenses wore greater than they had expected, and consequently, having had to pay an amount duo on a previous entertainment, they had paid the Com* inittee the balance. Other members of the troupe being sworn, gave corroborative evidence. The bill of the performance was here handed to the Bench, and it was ascertained that the defendant woe represented thereon os " The Great Brooks on his dying trapeze." Cox, a witness for the defence, after explaining the reasons for the troupe offering their services to the School Committee, said they were surprised at the plaintiff's action, os he might have known that their expenses were heavy. The Bench said that from an examination of the accounts, it seemed there was a discrepancy between the balance-sheet and the letter sent by defendant, and it resolved itself into » question of adjustment between the School Committee and the troupe, rather than the public and the troupe. There had boon 30s charged against the entertainment that did noi belong to it, and the discrepancy of £1 2s mado a total of £2 12s, that the troupe should hand over to the Committee. Judgment would be for the defendant.— J. Bell v. P. W. Delamain, claim £6l6s 6d j judgment for plaintiff by default.—J. Allen, trustee in the estate of Irving Armstrong, v. W. A, Benn, claim £6 Bs. Mr M'Connel for plaintiff, Mr Scott for defendant. In the absence of the plaintiff, Mr M'Connel allowed the claim to be reduced to £3 Bj, and judgment was given for that amount. Public Woskb Act.— The application of Henry Lough, for power under this Act to drain through the land of one John Smith, a minor, which has been the subject of litigation for a length of time, came on for decision. Mr Scott appeared for Lough, and Mr M'Connel for O'Malley, the executor in the estate. Mr M'Connel said at the outset that he had tried to induce his clients to have a proper valuation made, and all his efforts had been frustrated, as they refused to have this done. He was, therefore, prepared to receive the Magistrate’s decision. Mr Whitefoord said it was a pity that O’Malley had not endorsed the wisnes of bis solicitor, as Mr M'Connel had, during the time that he had the case in his hands, taken a great deal of pains in it. They could not be guided by precedent, as the English Acts, though somewhat similar, were of no use for comparison, and they had to determine the question solely on its merits. They had considered the various points raised by Mr M'Connel, and found that for the purposes of the application the whole of the requirements had been complied with. With regard to Mr Pemberton’s status, they found that for those purposes he was qualified as on expert. Having therefore no precedent, they had taken every precaution to deal with the application in a way not to injure the estate of the minor. They had visited the ground on more than one occasion, and found it to be nothing less than a morass or natural swamp, and in fact they had some difficulty in getting through it. After due consideration, therefore, they decided—l. That the drain through Smith’s land is necessary as an outlet for Lough’s drainage. 2. That the proper course of the drain can be procured with leee difficulty and with the least injury to anyone in the manner pointed out in the application. 3. That the damage done, if any, can be best met by compensation in this route than any other. 4. They assessed the amount of compensation at £lO, to be paid to Smith, and they made the following order, viz., that one bridge suitable for carrying a loaded dray, should be built at a point to be decided as the moat suitable; that the soil taken from the drain shall be Eroporly smoothed, and not left either in oles or lumps; that a drinking place be made for cattle at each side of the drain, and be properly fenced to prevent injury to the drain; that the drain be kept clean, applicant to have reasonable entrance allowed him for that purpose, and that no dam or obstruction be placed in the drain by either party. He had not compiled a written decision, bat that was roughly what they had agreed to, and he would submit it to Mr M'Connel. They had, in fact, acted more as arbitrators, and depended on the moral right and the broad principle of justice than by any guidance. He would be willing to go over the ground again to point out what was required to be done; but there was nothing to prevent the drain being commenced at once. Mr M'Oonnel’s bill of costs would be submitted to him, add he would determine as to the order for payment afterwards. Mr M'Connel said he acted according to instructions in giving notice of appesL

SOUTH BAZAIA. Thubsday, Deo. 15. (Before J, Beswick, Esq., 8.M.) Cattle at Lahgb.— Twenty-six informations were laid respecting stray cattle and hones, and fines ranging from 5s to £l, and in one case 25s were inflicted, together with oosts 2s in each case. Using Obscene Language. Thomas Hill, charged with the above offence, was fined 20s and costs. G. Shedock was charged with using obscene language, and was fined 10s and costs 6s. John Lobb, for the same offence, was fined 20s and costs.

WAIMATS. Thubsday, Dec. 16. (Before R. Beetham, Esq., 8.M.) Wife Dbsebtion. —William Bouthby, for deserting his wife Emily Southby, on August 20, 1880, was sentenced to one month’s imprisonment with hard labour, and ordered to pay 12s 6d per week to the support of his wife and family. Fbujt Stealing.— William Bateman and Beniamin Batchelor, two little boys, were charged with the larceny of fruit from a private garden. Bateman did not appear, and a warrant was issued for his arrest. The case was adjourned till next Court day. Cattle Tbesfabs.— The following persons were fined for offences of this nature John Hunt, 10s j Isaac Oordner.lOi; Edward Hunt, 10s; Martin Thyne, 20s. Two further charges against John Hunt and Isaac Oordner were dismissed. , _ ~ T drill Oases.— Brown and Walker v. J. Wilson, claim £l3. Judgment by consent for£4, each party to pay their own costs.—W. Smith v. Q. J. Cuming and B. Hammond, £Bl 10s. Mr Hawkins for plaintiff, and Mr Clement for defendants. Case withdrawn with costs to defendants.