MAGISTERIAL.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2193, 30 March 1880, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

TIMARIT —THIS DAY[Before R. Bcetham, Esq., R.M.] DRL T N KEN NESS. A first offender was lined ss. ALLEGED WIEE ASSAULT. William Fitzgerald was charged with assaulting and heating his wife, Mary Ellen Fitzgerald. The accused pleaded not guilty. Mary Ellen Fitzgerald, the wife of the accused, deposed that they were living at Sandietown, and had been married for 2G years past. To-night week her husband returned home and struck her once, lie had never done such a thing before, and had now promised her that he would take the pledge for life. By Inspector I’ender —The blood and wounds on witness’ person when she came to the station house were caused by her falling down and hurting herself, and not of the assault. The witness gave her evidence with evident reluctance, and His Worship remarked that it was evident that she wished to screen her husband. Unless she gave her evidence fully it was impossible that the case could proceed, the accused would therefore be discharged. The accused Thank you, your Worship. His Worship—Don’t thank me, but thank your wife. The “happy pair” then left the Court together. CIVIL CASES. In the following cases judgment went by default with costs : Deputy Commissioner of Land Tax v. Edwards —Claim, £5 4s 3d for land tax due to the department. Mr Jameson for plaintiff applied for solicitor’s fee in addition to ordinary costs. The application was granted when the amount claimed did not exceed £5. Same v. B. Lane—Claim, £5 7s; Same v. Thomas —Claim, £4 14s ; Same v. Fyfe—Claim, £ll IGs id; Same v. King—Claim, £ls 6s. Macintyre v. Thompson—Claim, £5 10s 9d ; Webster v. Thompson—l7s; McKinnon v. Lambert—Claim, £1312; Same v. Reid—Claim, £2 2s ; Acton v. Evans— Claim, £lO 11s 7d ; Shepherd v. Blanchett Claim, £2B 13s lid ; Hope v. Coram Claim 15s ; Hope v. Gardner Claim, £3 os. Higgins v. Thompson—Claim, £6 3s. Jackson v. Murray —Claim, £l7 13s 3d. Bank of New Zealand v. Murray— Claim, £l7 17s Sd. Burgess v. Rogers— Claim, £2O 6s 7d. Jones and Another v. Walker—Claim, £8 10s lOd. Jackson v. James —Claim, £l7 10s 7d. White v. Rogers —Claim, £95 amount due on a promissory note. Newberry v. Henry—Claim, £2 4s 6d ; £2 having been paid into Court, judgment for 4s 6d and costs.

In the cases Hope v. Hickey—Claim, £3 2s 6d ; and the Same v. Walker — Claim, £1 16s 3d, judgment was given for the defendants.

Holmsby and Byers v. Farrer. This was a judgment summons. The defendant was ordered to pay 10s per week in satisfaction of the debt.

In the cases McKinnon v. Mannington ; the Same v. Baird; Same y. Warne ; and the Same y. Stonyer, the plaintiffs were nonsuited. Levy y. Fisher —Claim, £2 10s Gd, for cricketing necessaries supplied. Mr Jameson appeared for the defendant, and pleaded “Not indebted.” It appeared that the defendant Fisher, a youth 19 years of age, had beeiy acting as secretary to the Phtenix Cricket Club, and the plaintiff now sought to hold him responsible for the debts contracted by the club, six members of which’, according to the _ plaintiff’s statement, had visited his shop and selected the goods. The defendant stated he was not present on the occasion in question; that it was the duty of the Treasurer to sec that the accounts of the Club were paid; and that he (the Secretary) was not responsible in any way. His Worship said that the purchase had evidently been a joint one ; “he could not be held responsible as Secretary for the money ; neither could the Treasurer ; they were no more liable than any other members of the Club. The plaintiff should have hold all the purchasers responsible in order to protect himself. Ho must be nonsuited. The Court then adjourned.