RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 318, 2 April 1875, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

'"' -'"'"'''''''Apbie Ist.'' 1 -.\;.'''''^;l' i: '"- .(Befor-i-H. Bobinspn, Esq, r , E.M.J. .-Q;

Janet Watson was charged" with beihg drunk afrd' disorderly/—The constable posed to "arresting accused, wht»was'/he u said, swearing and making,.a 'Aa-, - cused declined to question witn"e'ss7 r re- t: " marking she was. well, known not-to be--giyen to swearing. , Constable.Maenama-.'r ra deposed to taking charge .of. accused" when brought to the. lock-up. She was-; in a drunken state. She was hammering at the lock up door with her boots.'; HadJ". to go and take her hoots offVher. !The Bench":' There were several- convictions I against the accused.. Fined 405.; or 48 hburs'-imprisbnment with'hard labor. • •->-"'-* The accused was further charged with vagrancy, to "which she pleaded not m- J debted, 'as she had lawfnl means of sup-r' port, '■ being engaged washing for men at" 5 the channel.;.. Sub-luspector [ deposed to kilqwihg ; the,.accused. .'..She.", was at times kept by a man named Earmer. f Had. ? had men, watching the. place; - where she lives, and have, been down myself.r woman/was living- witb-f her. Considered, they were living, in prostitution. / Men frequent the place ati". all times. The other woman, had .promised to"3eave : the:place. Accused had^£ frequently'been warned. She was often under the influence of drink.' MachanYara confirmed the evidence of Sub-Inspector. Cross-examined: Whattinie did you ever see men in the speak.the, .truth now? Constantly/: The T accused, being called upon by the Bench > to give a good account of her. modeoflife," stated she received money for, and in letters from Dunedin;, and from EarmeriM Sheihad her waShtub, aiuLal/I ways kept her bills square. Did not se'e any man in the' Court who could give eviden'cefor ier. ; She washed for Earmer, and had been to him almost the,same 'as a. ., wife'.'-" The Magistfate ! remarked that the : ~ accused ( had been, ; so. often before ttie- T Court that'he.would be very weak if not" inflieting" the full, penalty—three 'months in The accuseds who was very impertinent throughout, the bearing, of the case, was frequently cautioned that such would only, confirm : the > Court, in tts opinion that she was a bad "vyomau." ' - ;:;i - F ■ ■ ■ ■•'- -'"■ •'■-•'

Franks and M'Kenna v: Napier.—Mr. .„ Ainies,'agent" for Mr: Franks, appeared: for the plaintiffs. Case was'of debt, JPfo appearance of. defendant; Judgment amount claimed, andcosts 9s- ' ' ;■ ': L.W. Busch y.. C. F Roberts.— £lO 14s. Debt;admitted. Judgment for amount claimed} and costi 19s. •■- Franks and M'Kenria''v. Donnellyj-r—----;Debff. * Mr. Mines" appeared for plaintiff."' [Defendant pleaded no%indebted..-..{Plain--, Itiffjnonsxiited.-, , ~,_ •" ; ' "_>. '_■• . 1 . \ Busch v. Andrew j23s;s.-'(No appearance-of defendant. Judg-:> ?ment for amount claimed, and costs 9«'.^i" '"

f 'Bernard G-ordon v:* Patriek j—Complaint of sureties' of ; tlie peUde^ ? T)ie % •complaint'' disclosed., 'jthreatenine '.' lariIguage— two: pins £d sticVtKis' fqrkj iintoj your.;, eyfe.",, : , Plaintiff, being said: Between 8 and 9 o'clock in ihe evening; -I was> passing; where Messrs.'. Bradley and -Flannigan were- at .work.-. X 'said to Flannigan; .Why did you not let me j 'Have' some of the surface soil for a contract I had. ~He ran at me witb7 a. Ifork." I'do' not wish : your Worship to' ihare.him severely"punished, 'but I amIfrigKtehed "Have had" threats* •us^ed^to. . The-'cas'e jvas'""gonejinjjo^a^witoess^being]" called_fqr the'de'-" j fence, who proved he hacTtlle pnlyfqrk;on the; ground; in his hand on the. top" of the. rick, and therefore swore, that Flannigan could not have threatened to stick the" fork into plaintiff's eye. It appeared a. wake was being performed in the neighborhood, and Bradley told Flannigan to keep quiet, and Gordon to go away, and not make a!, noise. The case was a very frivolous arid was dismissed. „