RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Volume III, Issue 26, 6 January 1864, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

S-"I Mo.VDAT, 4th JA.NU4KT, 1864. ; 1 (Before M. fricey -Esq., 8.M.) [ Iv l DRONKKMifißi*.— Two peraott'* names were "Jja toe sheet for thU offence ; one ww fined 4 fjO«, and the other not appearing, his bail (£2) >s * it* ord*«d to be furleited. ' ,' r • : 1...v;,'.,:•;( * ... v ; ,'., : •; vCifit, Casks. ... ; .- :;.\-: •': - ' ;"■ k » . MVU>fVr V. XIU.SH AKD BOBERTaO.V. - *l >#Tr Button appeared for the plaintiiff; Mr' * fttTxej. for the defendant*. The «cti<okjru brought for the recovery of V ir»g e> sieged to be due to plaiutifF, at the f»te of £1 per day, as barman at the Victoria Hotel. :,The evidence of "the plaintiff was to il the effect that he had been engaged on the Jk lUthorit/ of the defendants, for the trust of ? Powell and Brown (who held the hotel), f. r °s The evidence 'for the d fence was in effect- '% ihftt the plaintiffs had not realised sufficient | profits from the sale of the 'liquors during , his m*n«geraent| and evidence was givea by X' "ikilled witiie9ses," that; profits ■frptai the W ole of liquors, &c , in hotels, amounted to ?- cent, per cent., an admission which appeared ■ a'- to elicit some: surprise from 'the;Bench. A ■t^ terdict for the defendants was given. II " TUESpAY,.STH JAFUART, 1864. # TnsMn itqt ix Pomessiox.— Maximilian T Wills was summoned by — - Pullen. : for an c . *ssault. . Mr M'Donald - appeared for the ~i defendant. The complainant stated that the ]4 defendant occupied a house of his as a weekly tenant, and not getting lus rent, he wanted a *. back his .house ; that' an order of. eviction j -ffas obtained, aud he went to the house, and was admitted into the premises by defendant's -wife. Jlfter remaining thero about an hour, ] s complainant returned home and resumed possession of the premises by the more ordinary ** law of physical ; force, ejecting t the com- *' plainant very, summarily put of the door. > JlrM'Donald cross-examined the complainant * „ in order to Show that he had not obtained » x admission to the premises in the manner he 1 ' detailed to the Bench, but had resorted to " more than the violehce legally authorised on j inch occasions,' and that the defendant had not used more than the - proper means of > v ejecting him from the house. As both sides had other witnesses to call, the case was adjourned to the next day for the purpose of calling them.: ; How Testimonials abb oot vp.-^-J. Holland, the manager of the Princess' Theatre, was summoned by John Lockyer. a comic singer, for the recovery of £5 10s Od. Mr South appeared for the plaintiff ; Mr Weston for the defendant.:- The action, which was i • bought to recover £5 10s Od,,the rvalue of a gold ring, wrongfully converted by t c defendant, disclosed some rather curious cir- " «urastances, connected with the way in which pu blic testimonials are got up. l&y the statement of the plaintiffs counsel, it appeared tliaton the termination of plaintiff's engagementatthePrinces3'Theatre(thentheCriteron - Concert Hall), defendant was so pleased with ,' the way in which plaintiff had Acquitted him- ' self during his two months engagement, that j he proposed to make him a present, publicly on the stage, and accompany it with a written testimonial of his professional abilities, j This was accordingly done, on the stage, on the night of the 24th November.-before the audience had dispersed, and in the presence of plaintiff's brother (and -ister) professionals. Under the: impression that the gift of the ring , was a bona fide proceeding, the deluded re- - cipient kept it on Ma finger all next day, and 'proudly showed it to his friends. He had not kept it, however, for more than a day, when the defendant borrowed it,- and ' he had never seen it since, j iS j Plaintiff called and. stated that j I he was a comic vocalist, or what was termed j I the " funny man" of the company at the -\| ('riterion; Concert Hall. After referring to theygeement he had made with defendant in fl^edin, he stated the circumstances tinder which the presentation tpok place on the at^gc of the theatre. It was on the " occasionj^f - his benefit, and as the defendant after reading a most flattering aidress placed the ring on his finger, the numerous audience (in the words of the song) "wery much applauded what he'd done." Next day Mr. Sbappere, the. jeweller from whose shop the ring had been procured, came and asked him for it, and afterwards, on the representation of the. manager that the" ring was only "■' borrowed from Mr Shappere, and belonged to another customer, and that he -(Holland)^ would have another like it male for plaintiff he^as induced to" part with" t>.e present, on the distinct [understanding he was to have j another in exchange. From that. time he had never seen the ring nor the exchange, and the ring, which, with Shylock, he might: have said *' he would not have battered for a wilderness of monkeys," was lost to him for ever. Evidence by other members of the company having been given that the ring was duly presented to plaintiff, Mr Holland, the defendant, was. called, and statedthe plaintiff was perfectly well aware at the tim^ the ring i ■was given to; him, that it was only "con- ! ditionally,"iJis the ring had been borrowed from the jeweller, and that he was to have ! " the iowo^f«fc:present of another ring when he I refunded some twelve or thitteen pounds which he had-reeeived for the disposal of tickets for Lis benefit— which benefit it was understood; 'sub rosa, was to be for the. pro- 1 prietor, Mr Hoskins. Tnis evidence was ! 1 corroborated by Mr Hoskins.: Mr Weston's defence was that there had been no actual presentation, and only under the conditions referred to by Mr Holland ; that, in fact, the £ presentation on the stage was merely the termination : ot a little farce" which had been played during the evening. The Magistrate, in giving his decision, made some rather severe comments on the transaction, which he characterised as discreditable to all parties. It was evident-, he said, that the presentation of the ring was all a shamin short, " a vile delusion and a snare." A preseniation had, however, been made of the rin g, and although conditionally on the plaintiff refunding any money he had belonging to defendant, that could not be allowed as a set- \ off. He should, therefore,' give" a"verdidt"for '- the amount claimed,. with 13s costs. . ;