RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume IV, Issue 250, 19 December 1873, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Decembeb IS. (Before W, Grvuaitt, Esq., and L. W. Busoh, .Esq., J,P;'s.) ' Dmhk and Disorderly. Alexander Johnstone for this offence was fined 10s. .KJBEPJNG- QPEN-AETEB 12 ' ' 'o'clock. ; J E; U l .: George-was charged, on the insformation of Constable Blair, with keeping his licensed hotisfe, 1 knownasthe Yiotoria Hotel, open after 12 o'clock in the evening, contrary to the provisions of the Licensing Ordinance, 1865, The informant gave evidenoe of the fact ;of his attention being drawn, by a publican of Naseby,- to the state of the house, and that, on proceeding to the Viotoria Hotel, he found the door unlocked, and two persona inside. Mr. George : May I ask the witness a question, your' Worship ? The Bench: Certainly. Mr. George: "Who called your attention to my house being open ? Sub-Inspector M ? Cluskey (to.the witness) •, Don't answer the question. (To the Bench): Tour Worship, that's a police matter.

Mr, G-rumitt: "Whether the question ia admissible or. not is for the Bench, and not for Mr. Sub-Inspector M'Cluskey, to decide.

Sub-Inspector M'Cluskey; Your "Worship, I have always understood that where a question referred to information supplied to the police it should not be asked. Mr, G-rumitt: It is a question for the Bench whether the question so affects the interests of justice as to render it advisable to be kept secret, (To the witness) : Answer the question. Constable Blair ; Mr. Collett.

Mr. George j That will do, I leave myself in the hands of the Court. I believe the house was open after hours, as two commercial gentlemen staying there had not come in. I was in bed myself at 11,30, J

The Bench inflioted a penalty of ss, and costs.

Thttbsday, Dbcbhbeb 18. (Before H. W. Bobinson, Esq., 8.M.) Hjorring v. M'Kenna—Claim, £6 18s. Judgment, by default, for amount claimed with oasts, Hurray v. Griffiths—Claim of £SO, Ihas case had been adjourned l from the Serpentine Court, as there was a letter from the defendant's solicitors, pointing out that defendant, as an administratrix, was only liable to the Supreme Court j and that an administratrix was not compelled to fay debts before the expiration of T e ii emontlls fromtlie date of the death ot *«» Jeoeased. The Magistrate overruled the objections, and gave judgment tor the amount, with costs 265, Murray v. Griffiths.-* Claim of £3O on an 1 0 XT, Judgment fop amount olaimed, with costs 80s,