RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4434, 5 June 1875, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Friday, June 4. (Before J. C. Crawford, Esq., R.M.) VAGRANCY. Wm, Shelton, who had just finished a sentence for vagrancy, was brought up again upon the same charge, having called at the lock-up on the previous evening and asked for lodgings, which were at once provided for him. Defendant, who is a tailor, stated that he was too old to work, but this statement was varied by the police, who alleged that he was so dirty in his habits that no one would employ him. His Worship gave defendant a month. ASSAOLT. A charge of assault, preferred against Laurence Farrelly by his wife Mary Farrelly, was adjourned in the absence of the defendant. BREACH OF BY-LAWS. Rafaele Portelli was charged with throwing rubbish into the street. The constable who remonstrated with the defendant said the latter at once consigned him to the nether regions, upon which Mr. Portelli expressed his regret that he had no witnesses, as the police would swear anything. Sergeant Monaghan said the City Council hadrequested the co-operationof the police in preventing offences such as that with which the defendant was charged, and it was consequent upon that request that the defendant made his appearance. Fined 10s. and costs. PROTECTION ORDER. In the case of D. G-. Reid, who was yesterday charged with wife beating and neglecting to support his wife, his Worship said he had decided to bind the defendant over to keep the peace for three months, himself in the sum of £lO, and one surety of £lO. An application on the part of the wife for a protection order was granted; the wife to have custody of the children, and the defendant to pay 10s. a week toward their support. MAINTENANCE. Richard Stewart, aged seventy-seven, was charged with neglecting to support his wife Elizabeth Stewart. Mr. A. E. Whitaker appeared to prosecute, Mr. Brandon to defend. The evidence in the case was very voluminous ; but the history of the parties, shortly stated, is as follows : The defendant, as already mentioned, is seventy-seven years old, and his wife is fifty-six. They were married only four years ago, when the defendant had a small amount of property and £IOO. After their marital alliance Stewart found that his wife, who was by far the better half, so dearly loved her liquor that when she once got hold of the bottle she left nothing but the cork and the smell. The ancient" dame kept up this little game with such persistency that the old man found he was no longer a man of substance, and his small capital having dwindled away till he had nothing but the rent of a leasehold property remaining (225. 6d. a week) and £ls a year for a section at Pahautanui, he determined to make over all he possessed to his son, who, in return, was to maintain him. It was part of the agreement that the son should also give his stepmother ss. a week. With this sum she went to live with a married daughter, but the latter being no longer able to maintain her, she now sued her husband for an additional allowance. Mr. Whittaker contended that the son was bound to maintain his father, independently of any arrangement for the transfer of his property, and that, therefore, he should be compelled to devote some portion of the 225. 6d. weekly towards the support of defendant's wife. Mr. Brandon said the son did all that could be expected of him. He was willing to support his father out of the small sum which the leasehold brought, but he was not willing, and could not be compelled to maintain his stepmother. As a matter of fact, the defendant was possessed of no property, and would, therefore, have to go to prison if the Bench made any award against him. His Worship Baid the case was rather a singular one, and he should, therefore, take time to consider his decision. After the disposal of one unopposed civil case, the Court adjourned.