RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Volume I, Issue 30, 20 February 1863, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before M. Price, Esq., B, M.) Tuesday, 17th February. A Mob of Inebriates,—- Joseph Thomson, found guilty of being drunk,' was fined 20s. -James McTavish and James Kpddy were fined 10s each. It being: the first offence of Robert Muir, John McArthiir, and Anne Hamilton, they were let off on payment of 5s each. • cryu. case. Nisbet v. S*unders. — Plaintiff claimed £3 lOs for wages alleged to be due. He had been employed as an able seaman on board the Success, and on refusing to act as cook was ordered ashore by the defendant. After hearing the case, the Bench recommended defendant to take plaintiff back co work ous his engagemeut, and thia was agreed to. Wednesday, 18th Februrry. Robbery. — Francis Hamilton was charged with having, on the night of "the lTth or morning of the 18th, stolen. £s 10s and the second of a, bill of exchange, from tbe person of ' William Kelly. Prosecutor said he was a seaman residing at the Bluff. He went to bed in the Criterion Kestaurant, Tay-street, on Tuesday night about ten o'clock, with the monsy and bill of exchange in his trousers pocket. He kept on his trousers. Early in the morning felt a slight pull at the pocket, and sitting up in bed saw some one go out of the room. Followed, and finding a man at the entry, accused him of taking the money,, which prosecutor missed. This person, denied the charge »nd said it must have been taken by prisoner, who had just ran past him into the court. Mr Hoskins affirmed that the person prosecutor had seized would not have, committed, robbery. He was taken to the watch-house and searched, but none of prosecutor's money was found on him. Afterwards the cook came and said there was a man in the well, which is nine or ten feet deep. Prosecutor and others went there and found prisoner in the well, supporting himself by pressing his back and feet against the sides. A constable took him out and away to the watch-house. Returning to the house found the money at the foot of the bed, There was four one pound notes, and three half-sovereigns wrapped up in the notes. The bill of exchange was found beside the well. The evidence of Mr Langley, who was first accused by prosecutor, the constable, and the cook of the Criterion having been taken, prisoner was remanded till next day. civil cases. Important to the Faculty.- — Right op a Clerk to Act as Counsel.— This question was discussed before His Worship at hearing I the case George v. MrLennan. I Mr Francis South, from the office of Mr M. S. South, solicitor, appeared for plaintiff and was about to open his case, when the Bench asked. if he was a solicitor? I Mr South — No, but I represent a solicitor. His Worship — 1 am afraid it cannot be allowed. Mr South — There is no statute against it. Mr Harvey, who was in court, on being asked by the Bench, said thAt so far as he knew there.jf as a statute against it. Mr South — 1 have appeared in the same capacity both in Dunedin and Port Chalmers. His Worship— The question is, have you any locus standi here ? . Mr South — As much as in Dunedin or elsewhere. His Worship — Then your conduct here is not as a right, but as a matter of permission on m}' part ? Mr Harvey^— So far from it being permitted in Auckland, I have seen a clerk turned out of the solicitor's seat. Mr South— That may be the case in Auckland, but as a solicitor's articled clerk, I have acted for him in Melbourne. Hie Worship here read the following clause from the " Law Practi toner's Act, 1861." "No person shall act aa a solicitor in any Court in New Zealand who is not at the time of his so acting a solicitor enrolled according to the provisions of this act and any person who shall offend against this provision, 3hall be deemed to be g.u'lty of a contempt of the court in which he shall so act and shall also be liable to a penalty not exceeding £50 for every 3uch offunce. 1 ' A clause from 6 and 7 Vie. c. 73, to the same effect, was also read. The only exception was in favor of Clerk? to Board of Guardians, made by the 7th and Bth Vie. c. 101, S 68. In the face of that how could Mr South go on ? Mr South— lam not here as a solicitor, but as a managing clerk, representing one. I can cite several cases where similar appearances have been made in Dunedin. His Worship — Is the practice of the Court in Dunedin to be the precedent for all the courts in New Zealand ? Mr South — No, but it is allowed. His Worship — I am glad Mr Harvey is present. Mr South \s not to take the matter in a personal light, but the duty devolves on me of seeing that on the practice of thi3 I court, everything is done according to law. 1 Mr Harrej- — I sjw the question opened up in Auckland, and the Magistrate very l properly put an end to it at once. The Chief Justice said the magistrate did quite right. His' Worship — I have no desire in the absence of Mr (M. S.) South to give a decision. Perhaps ho might bring forward precedent to which I would be ready to bow ; therefore. I will not decide on the case. But this I will say, that until he returns, and shows that he is entitled to be represented by you, I cannot permit you to plead in this court. That will leave, it an open question, and I will b 2 very glad to have it referred to the Judge in Dunedin. Mr South — It has been done in Dunedin. Mr Harvey — I very much doubt if Judge Gresson would permit it. His Worship — I consider it a very important point, and do not wish to rule on my own opinion. Here are two statutes on the subject, to my mind clear. If one person can represent a solicitor, I do not see how any one in court — a stranger, for instance — might not do so. Mr South — I am an articled clerk, and that is quite different. His Worship — Can you point to where it is allowed ? Mr South — There is no statute against it. Mr Harvey— l can give experience direct on the subject. I was articled for a short time to Mr Winn in Auckland, and he made application that I should appear for him before the Justices, while he was attending the Supreme Court, but it was decided I could not. He was therefore obliged to give a number of cases to another solicitor. Mr South — I went to Mr Strode in Dunedin, and he had no objections to me acting for Mr South. It is done daily there, and in Melbourne, as you know, to further the ends of justice. His Worship — I do not know. I would not have spoken, but since you so pointedly appeal to me — I do not know. Mr Harvey — I do not see how the "ends of justice " can be furthered by an articled— Mr South — This is uncalled for. Mr Harvey- I have given you full scope when I need not have done so. I might have applied at once to have you committed for contempt of com t. His vVbrship — I will keep the question open ; if I am wrong you have your reined) 1 - ; you can get a mandamus against me. Or, if .it bej referred to the Judge in what may be termed a friendly suit, no one will be more willing. ' •"'Mr Harvey— The. best plan- is for Mr South, to appeal to the judge. I made the objection from no personal feeling to Mr South, but on

hroiid principles. Where i^Ould it stop if he were admitted. * *J\ L ' , r >- v His Worship— lf, for one moment, personal feeling get into these matters it will be better to elope the court. It ought to b'e/tlie object of the Bench ,_ and counsel on both side?; to, see" that justice is done, and every thing 1 according to law. Our judgments should be for the public good, and not from paltry personal motives. Mr South concurred; "and Mr Harvey? at his request, consenting 1 to conduct the cases, they were proceeded with. Davies v. M'Leeman, Jones v. do., and George r. do. — Plaintiff's wefe^ seamen on board the cutter Alfred, and the claims were for twenty days wages for the voyage from_ Dunedin to Inveicarglll. The defence was, that they had shipped for the -Chatham I-lands, and had no right to Wye at this port. Plaintiffs averred their agreement was the trip to Invercargill, and they left the vessel on account of the bad provisions supplied to them. Consideiable delay was caused wfth the case of Geoige, who is a Portuguese, and cannot speak English, .Defendant said he understood it. well enough on board. His Worship; observedj ''I have no doubt of it.; captains generally have a very summary way of making seamen .understand them." Mr. T. J. White was sent for 10 act as interpreter,. • but when he came plaintiff had gone forrsv fellow countryman, a seaman, on board the; Success. His services were accepted, »nd hV fulfilled the duties iv a most intelligent; manner. Judgment for plaintiffs in amount claimed, with costs, which included 03 to the interpreter. ; TntrRSDAT, 19th Febritart. Scarcely S»BEit. — Uoberfc McLaren, who was at large on hail,, appeared to answer a charge of being drunk in Tay-street the:previous evening.. Betraying symptoms of being , still ll under the influence" the magistiate ordered his removal till he got quite sober. A "Detotee to Bacchus."— Win. Hemy Fitzgerald, who has been repeatedly before the court for drunkenness, was accused of the old offence, and at once pleaded guilty. His Worship, referring to a list of convictions, called attention to the fact that his last sentence had been one of imprisonment. Prisoner explained this by stating . that he had been very unruly and broke several windows on that occasion. This time he was quie quiet. Fined in 20s and cpst3. Walking the Same Road.— John RobinBnn, for being drank and disorderly in Deestreet, was fined 10s. Thomas, or Neilson Fraser, and John Merrileea, for being drunk in Tay-street, were fined 5s each. ' Inebriates at the Race Course. — "Norman Scott, for being the worse of liquor on the race course on Wednesday, was fined ss. John McDowall was fined £2 for being drunk, and conducting himself so as to provoke a breach of the peace. After taking a drop too much prisoner commenced using hia fists in a manner more free than agreeable, and accordingly he was taken into custody.