MAGISTERIAL.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2364, 14 October 1880, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

TEMUKA —YESTERDAY. (Before E. Guinness, Esq., R.M., and S. D. Barker, Esq,, J.P.) DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. A case of tin's nature against Robert Kelly, who did not appear, was dismiss-ed at the request of the police, as the accused lived some distance from the Court and had attended last Court day. breach of the public house ordinance. George Smith, T. Housley, and Addison were charged by the police, that on Sept. 27 last they did behave in a riotons manner in the Winchester Hotel, and refused to leave when requested. Mr Hamersley appeared for the prosecution, and Mr Austin for the defendants.

This was an action brought against three out of ten persons who refused to quit a licensed house when asked at the time for closing, and smashed several windows.

Thomas Newman deposed—l saw the defendants in Swinton’s Hotel at Winchester on the night in question. They refused to leave, and it was half-past twelve before I got them away. I refused to supply them with liquor. At 11.30 I asked them to leave, but they refused, and I was about to turn the lights out when they threatened to knock me over. They were in a room, and I could not get admission, as the door was barricaded. Mrs Swinton asked them to leave, and they used an insulting expression in reply. After they left I heard glass smashing, and on examination I found two panes of glass broken in one window and a pane in another. Could not say who smashed them.

To Mr Austin—The accused had been singing and were not quarrelsome. They remained for an hour after being ordered out.

T. Swinton deposed—The last witness is a cook at niy hotel. Mrs Swinton asked me to go down to get the men out of the house ns they were using obscene language. They left at once when I interfered. Defendants were fined £1 each and ordered to pay 28s costs for refusing to leave the premises. The charge re damaging property was dismissed as the evidence was insufficient.

CIVIL CASE. Judgment by default was given in the following cases :—J. W. White r. A. Waddle, £6 6s ; Gumming and Hayes v. Gr. Lynch, £7 15s 6d , same v. D. King, £4 18s ; same v. F. Pratley, £5 11s ; same v. G-. Hart, £6 10s ; same v. Albert (a native), 12s 6d; same r. C. Jones, £6 10s. Franks v. Dorrock. Adjourned claim for damages through a horse being driven into a malthouse. Several additional witnesses were examined including James Franks, who stated that when the mare was galloping towards the malthouse followed by defendant he (the witness) was about ten yards distant, and that his father made no effort to prevent the animal getting into the premises. Plaintiff “was thereupon no'.suited, each party to pay their own costs. The Court then adjourned.