RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 143, 1 May 1862, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wednesday, 30th Avrii., 1862.. i, (Before Alfred Chetham Strode, Esq., It.M.)

Drunkenness. — Julius-Lee, Timothy Hebe, John Redmond, and John Hogan, -were fined 20a respectively, with the ordinary alternative, in der fault. Assault.—Joseph Gomaa charged John Brown, a man. of color, with having assaulted him in "Walkerstreet, last night. The accused admitted the charge, but said he was drunk at the time. He was fined 20s. and costs, or in default, committed to gaol for one month. Nuisances.—Mr. James Nimon made the following reports: R. &. Gfibbou, nuisance in course ■.of removal. .Case adjourned to this day week.—-In the case against one John Stewart, it was stated that the summons hail not been served, and that the defendant had gone away in the Aldinga steamer. Summonses:—Captain Joseph; Wilson versus Messrs. Tickle & Co.—Action brought" on damages done to the "Victoria Dining- Rooms, £16; temporary repairs, £1 Bs., surveyor's fees, as per account, £1 10s., damages sustained in the business, £1 25., making a total of £20. Mr. Prendergast, in the interest of the plaintiff, applied "for an adjournment, because Mr. Poeppel, the town surveyor, had made a survey of the premises, but was not in attendance, and the learned gentlemnn apprehended that the Bench would object to admit the report embodied in the document that he held in his hand. Case remanded until to-morrow at eleven,, for' the personal evidence of Mr. Poeppel.— Wilkie _v. Raphael.—No appearance of defendant. Judgment for plaintiff'hi the sum of £5 10s., together with costs, 9s.—Hastie v. Cunninghame.—No appearance of cither party, case dismissed. The particulars of demand were tor flour, salt, and hops, supplied from 17th-April to 28th April instant. —George-Davis y. Charles Clipp.—Defendant was dead in law,'being imprisoned on committal for highway robbery, and could not consequently appear. His Worship observing that he should certainly not pronounce an ex-parte judgment. The plaintiff was, however, permitted to have an interview with the- defendant prisoner in H.M. gaol.. . The Court rose at twenty minutes before twelve o'clock (noon). , '