RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 533, 30 April 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Monday, Arms'29.' (Before J. C. Crawford, Esq., 8.M.) DRUNKARDS. William Dransfield, who had been locked up since Saturday night, was dismissed. William Reece, James Laurie, and Henry Roberts were each fined 10s, or in default 48 hours’ imprisonment, for being drunk on Sunday. Charles Heron denied having been drunk. The apprehending constable, however, proved that he was, and that £7O in: sovereigns were found in his pocket. His Worship fined him 6s, or in default 24 hours' imprisonment. ! . , VAGRANCY. ' : /' Elisa Broughton, an old offender, %vas charged with having no lawful visible means of support. Accused denied the charge. The police proved four previous convictions against her. As she promised never to appear in Court again his Worship discharged her. AN ALLEGED POISONING CASK. . William O’Connor was charged attempting to poison William Light, proprietor of Barrett’s Hotel, on the ,23th inst., with intent to commit murder. A report of the analysis made by Dr Hector was produced in Court. The report was to the effect that that' the liquor contained strychnine, but that further examination would bo made. On tlio application o£ tha police accused was remanded'until Thursday. , U

CIVIL OASES. D. Bell v. Park Young. Claim £l3 15a. 6d., for three weeks’ rent of cottage and damage done to property. i _ Mr. Gordon Allan appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. PitzGerald for the defendant, who paid 15s. into Court. \ After hearing the evidence, his Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for £1 155., together with the amount paid into Court, and costs. ; G. Pndney v. W. Pasohke. Claim £l4, value of a horse. Mr. E, Chapman appeared for the plaintiff, for whom judgment was given by default for the amount claimed and costs. Solomon Levy y. J. B. Jacquarie. Claim £1 55., for rates. . Mr. Travers appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Eitzherbert for the defendant, who contended that the ground was Government property, and was free from rates. Under See-' tion 9 of the Bating Act for any property let for a'term under six months the owner was liable, and not the occupier. Mr. Travers said that no objection had been made at the time the property was rated. The defendant stated that the ground was a gaol reserve. He paid £l3 a year for it in monthly payments. He took possession of the place under the impression that he would not have to pay rates. He was told that ho was liable to be turned off the place at any time. His predecessor was sued for rates, and his Worship nonsuited the plaintiff. Mr. Crawford held Mr. Eitzherhert's objection fatal, and nonsuited plaintiff. The Court then adjourned.