THE COURTS.

Marlborough Daily Times, Volume II, Issue 166, 22 October 1880, Page 3

THE COURTS.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Blenheim, Friday, October 22. (Before 11. Mclutire, Esq., R.M]. MAINTKNTNCK. Edmund Stratford was charged by his wife, Emma Stratford, with having neglected to make payments ordered by 8. L. Muller, Esq., R.M., oil the23rd February, IS7S, at the rate of LI 5s per week, for the support of his family, the sum of LI6 5s being now due and owing. Air Stratford said he intended to employ counsel but he had only received 48 hours’ notice of this summons, and he begged to ask for an adjournment for a fortnight as he had a number of witnesses to call. He handed in the following “ pleas ” as he termed them, to the Court :—l. —That the order was illegally obtained at the time. 2.—That tlie said order was condoned immediately after being made, by the plaintiff living with tlie defendant as husband and wife again, and therefore the defendant had not neglected to make payment. .3 — That tlie plaintiff at that time took another man into her confidence, and that they together obtained a writ of ejectment against defendant in order to give the plaintiff absolute possession in her own riglt when she has lived for the last two years unmolested by defendant. 4.—That the information in the plaint is therefore not true, inasmuch as the plaintiff lives in possession of property worth LGOO by her own choice. 5. —That after such ejectment the defendant was obliged to find another home which has always been open to all of his family, and where they have never been refused. fi.—That the family have received support from defendant. 7. —That the defendant never had any objection to take all the children, but apprehends that the law does not require him to maintain two homes. Mrs Stratford said she would not go on with the case. Her husband had treated her very badly and accused her without the slightest foundation, and would not pay anything for the support of his family. He was alwajs promising to do something for their support but lie never kept his word, and was always shuffling and making excuses. It was no use trying to get him to do anything for his children and she did not intend to come into Court any more but would withdraw the case, but she wished the world to know what sort of a man be was, and how lie had neglected his family. The case was accordingly withdrawn.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Havelock, Monday, Oct. IS. (Before J. Allen, Esq., R.M.)

LARCENY. William Galloway, a recent arrival from Nelson, was charged with feloniously stealing a pair of trousers value 5s from the premises of Thomas Brown, a carter living at Havelock. The prosecutor; in reply to Sergeant Hogan, who conducted the prosecution, said he knew the prisoner by sight, and remembered the night of the 11th instant when he missed the trousers from his premises, where they had been hanging up on a clothes line in his backyard. Ho reported the loss to Sergeant Hogan who, on the following evening brought him the pair of trousers which lie at once identified as the same pair which he had missed. He never gave permission to the prisoner or anybody else to take the trousers, which he values at ss. They originally cost 11s By the R.M. : —A person would have to get over the rails to gut into the yard where the trousers were. Sergeant Hogan deposed to the apprehension ef tlie prisoner in consequence of information received from the last witness. Tlie Bench convicted the prisoner and sentenced him to seven days’ hard labor. Another charge against the prisoner of stealing beer from Air Scott’s brewery was withdrawn, Mr Scott not wishing to prosecute,