Untitled

Southland Times, Volume I, Issue 17, 9 July 1864, Page 3

Faro ay, Bth July, 1861. (Beforo M. Price, Esq., R.M.) W. Murray, for drunkenness, was fined ss. Mark Stevens was brought up on a charge of assault, at the instance of one John Walsh. Mr Button defended the prisoner. John Walsh stated he demanded of the prisoner a settlement ofhis wages. He told me to make out an account. He afterwards asked me to sign a receipt for £10 on account. Stevens then used threatening language towards me. He said he would take mv life. He made an attempt to strike, seeing which, "l stepped aside. The amount due to me is £32. The prosecutor had no wish to press the charge, and the Bench bound prisoner over to keep the peace for six months, he finding two surties in £25 each, and himself in £50. ASSATTLT. W. Ross was charged with assaulting a constable whilst in the execution of his duty, in the Theatre Royal on the previous evening. The constable stated that he had been creating a noise, so much so that the musicians and the actors had to stop playing. He was very violent, and bit me on the legAnother constable corroborated the evidence. Mr. Button, who defended the case, said he was instructed that the prisoner was under the influence of liquor, but that no violence was used. He called William Waikes, check-taker at the stalls, wno said he saw the disturbance. The prisoner was talking to a friend, about Stewarts Island, when the policeman came up to him, and said that if he did not " dry up," he would give him a slap on the nose. He was not making any disturbance. He could nofc : strike any one, as the policeman held him down. Tlie Bench sentenced the prisoner to pay a penalty of £5. Two individuals, charged with being drunk and disorderly, were fined os. each. William Edgars was charged with riding on the footpath of Deveron-street, on the 6th. The case was not clearly proved, and it was dismissed, with a caution. . Another man -was charged with furious riding, bo a3 to endanger the. lives of passengers. The defendant called his employer, who gave evidence as to his riding at only a reasonable pace. The Bench dismissed the case, with a caution. Francois Forsola, who was charged with horsestealing, was again brought up. This was a remanded case. It was further remanded for a period of seven days. Crra^CASES. Gbamt v. Waikeb. — Claim for £5. Defendant made no appearance. Judgment in favor of plaintiff, for amount, with costs. DAIBYMPI-B V. IOJBI-LEB AKD GEISOW. This was an action to recover the sum of £10, which had been paid as a deposit on the purchase of some land from defendants in November, 1863. The price of the ground bought was £180.-' '"' Mr..Dalrymple stated that he had made repeated'applications to defendants for the title to the prope^fy; but without avail. He had emEloye<TMr. iTDonald to look into them, and he ad declared them.worthless. When I heard this, I caUe'don defendants for the purpose of having my depositrefuhded. 'i They said that their client was not in the Province, but that they had written to him repeatedly- on the*Bubject. . Mr." Geiibw did. hot deny having received tho £10 asa deposit' ph^the purchase of the property referrM'tq;" but as i his 'client wasa veiy particular man, and seeing that he might raise all sorts of objections if ;the^.epbsit was made ov t er to plaintiff, he wished'that the. Court: would decide the matter. The Bench'; gave, a'yerdict for plaintiff for amount. I -'."". ... '■•..--■■ . GbAham: V. Hto^b.— rClaim' for £12 75. ; 6d. for building a small house and .making alterations on it accordihg.to orders given by defendant. The defendant' stated that" the original price was to be : £6 10s., but finding that the house, would be too small, he had agr'eed'topay^ 20s. more for its being enlarged in length a foot and a half. The evidence ofthe plaintiff Jfehig'strongerj and being borne out by A-^teeks^the-Bench gave judgment in his fevor. "'.'. ■,- -.4 Ayy-, -J.- . y -. <■ .■■",' -. A The Court then 'rose.; ,;. ,T '