RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5612, 25 March 1879, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Monday, Maeoh ' 24. (Before T. A. Mansford, Esq., R.M.) . DRUNKENNESS. .. ; Four inebriates,-three of whom were women, • were charged with drunkenness, and summarily dealt with. ■ - 1 BREACH OP THE PEACE. ; Malcolm MoPhail and James Stout were charged ;with committing a breach of the peace by fighting in Webb-street. Prisoners pleaded guilty, and were fined 10s. each. I . ... ASSAULT. . , • ■ , John T. : Jones was charged with uhlawfully beating and wounding one Henry Banks by striking him with a handspike,. As Banks,was in th 6 Hospital and.iinable to attend, the case was remanded for eight days) A TRUMPERY CHARGE. Michael Neatly wai’charged -by the police ' with being illegally oh‘the premises of Charles Samson, in Willis-street. From the evidence ! it appeared that the accused, who_ is a very respectable tradesman, got the worse of: liquor and made his way unknowingly on the premises • of Samson. Accused was discharged .from custody, hut told to appear before the Court next day (Tuesday). • WIFE DESERTION. ’ ' ' “ . Henry Thomas Here, a seafaring man, was charged with deserting his wife at'Dunedin. ‘ ( Prisoner offered:to pay 30s. a week, and was ■’ '< remanded until next day (Tuesday). , : ■ ’'i- ’ LARCENY. : / • ,'' ; ' Edward Peel, on remand, was charged with stealing ten kegs of nails, the ■ property of Guthrie and Larnaoh, valued at £9. The case' was further remanded- 1‘ ’ , . ■ ■ : . F. Joiner was charged on the information of uii Themaa Urwin with stealing one bottle of brandy, two bottles of champagne, and two bottles of-ale, 1 valued at £2 4s.- 6d. Prisoner ‘ 1 pleaded guilty. The prosecutor gave prisoner , a most excellent character,' stating' that' he ; was night watchman, and had held the position for seven months. His Worship'sent him to gaol for four weeks. 1 : i 1 CIVIL CASES. - ■ judgment summonses.—O. Ludwig v. A. Dryer, claim',£s ‘ Is.;* ordered to pay the . amount-in fourteen days, or three weeks’ imprisonment. L. ■C. St. George v. G.‘ Williamson, claim £25 Us.; to be paid in three days, or eight weeks’ imprisonment. ■■ S. Morris v. D. Bell,-claim £4 45.; to be paid in three day-a, or two weeks’ imprisonment. F. Vallentine v. B. Maokay, claim £4 2s. 6d.; ordered td ‘' .pay in a month,'or two weeks’ imprisonment, J. Stewart v. E. Pearce.—Claim £ls, for a month’s .wages, . claimed through being dis- ■ charged without notice. Mr. Ed wards.for the r plaintiff,"and Mr, .Allan for defendant.-■ /- Plaintiff, who was . master of the schooner Aurora, deposed! that. he; had beett master, for i four years. On his last trip from tho East . Coast he was-told by Mr. Pearce’s representative that his services as - master would be no longer required. The vessel on the last trip was longer than usual, owing to having experienced adverse weather. Mr. Allan for the defendant contended that. the owners had a perfect right to dismiss the ‘captain owing to numerous complaints as to his long voyages;' There was no specification as to his agreement, and he was engaged for an unspecified time. _ William -Henry Meech, manager-for-E. ; Pearce, deposed that he had received com- - plaints from nearly every consignee on the Coast, and had been, threatened with actions for the non-delivery of goods. It was a practioeliere to. pay off captains without hotice. 'He had done the same thing three times. Captain' Thomas deposed that he had been owner of vessels trading here for ten years. It was r the rule; amongst small coasters .to • sail, . without articles, 'lt was customary to pay off - any hands on the arrival of the vessel in port. The same rule applied with the men. They could always demand their wages on arrival Daring his experience he had discharged some dozens of masters. ,: _■ . , W, R. Williams, master mariner, and James Stewart, owner of small- vessels,' gave corroborative evidence. - : : His Worship thought from the evidence that the plaintiff-was serving under articles, and therefore entitled to, a: menthVwages, and judgment was given for' the plaintiff for the amount claimed and costs. . . , Salmon v. Smith.—Claim £B9 10a. Mr. Allan for plaintiff, and Hr. Ollivier for de- . feridant. ‘: ’" ’!. ... • ■ Mr--Mian, in his opening- remarks, stated . that the sum oE £l2 15s. 43.’hid been 1 paid ■’ into Court with costs, and clainjed a set off for

£l2 4s, Bd., alleging-that 'defendant . was not j liable /or" more thaa £2s..The ftpWop£ wos j brought for 'work'.'done.,in* reference to alte-; ration and repairs to some patent-revolving shutters. They were old,,shutters, and some time ago' the. plaintiff 'repaired a single shutter j for defendant, and subsequently was engaged i to do some mpro work. : ; . i V/Forthd'defence it’was'contended that the ■ 67affi’'was tT gross overcharge. .-At; 4 o’clock; nearly completed, and .was ad- - fOurned'until Wednesday.', ' . ; In the following cases judgments.were.given j for plaintiffs:—o. Plummer: Y- • Dopue,: claim £l2 14s. 2d,, far ,interest on mx overdue promissory note; Martha Fairley.v, Elizabet Clarke, claim £1 Is, for rent; T. Mahey v. J. Horford, claim £3 ss. Bd., goods supplied; H. Elliott v. G. Tonks, claim £lC>, l»s,j d. Loubere ■y’.'tl’Jeatro, claim £l; , Bame v. L. Apontolo, claim 13». ; • ' The Court then adjourned.