RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Issue 1768, 18 July 1873, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

« (Before F. M'Culloch, Esq., R.M.) Tttesdat, 15th Jtjlt. Agnes Gunn was brought up by the police charged with being " a reglected child." The child is about 8 years of age, and was found by the police in Don street, on the previous evening, cold and destitute, having, as she stated, been without food all day, and having slept -with her mother in a hen house on the Sunday night. By the evidence of the police it appeared that the mother is a woman of drunken habits, and in other respects of bad character ; that the father has been unheard of since January, and lhafc the mother was now destitute. To this statement the mother in part agreed, but denied having deserted the child, whom she suid she had only left for a few minutes, during whi -h the police had found her. His Worship ordered the child to be sent to the Industrial School in Du-iedin for seven years ; at the same time telling the mother that' if dnrine that time she could show herself in a position to maintain the child it would be restored to her. Geary v Smith.— Plaintiff claimed £20 for damages sustained by his chill baring been bitten by defendant's dog Mr Wade appoared for plaintiff, and Mr Harvey (for Mr T. M. Macdonald) for defendant. The parties w re neighbors at Myross. Bush, and so far back as 12th April, the child of plaintiff was sent to defendant's house with a message, and was bitten by the dog severely in the arm. Defendant having been male aware of the injury at the time of its occurrence, an action was afterwards brought by plaintiff for damages, which was settled and withdrawn, a condition of the settlement being alleged to have been that the dog should be destroyed This not having been done, the present action was brought, to which the defence was mainly that the agree ment was not to destroy the dog, but simply to put it away, which defendant was willing to da as soon as he could get another. It was also urged that the dog was not vicious ; that tho damage might have been caused simply by the playfulness of the dog with his paw upon the tender skin of the child, 7 years of age, and that beyond her testimony there was no evidence that the dog had inflicted the injury. As the alleged biting took place in tho paddock of defendant, argument was taken on the question whether defendant's paddock constituted " a public place" within the meaning of the " Injuries by Dogs ' Act, 1868." His Worship thought the injury had been proved to be occasioned by the dog, but that it had not been proved that defendant had been previously aware that the dog was vicious. The whole matter would therefore turn upon the question whether the paddock, was " a public place" within the meaning of the Act. He would reserve his judgment until to-morrow. Wednesday, 16th July. Charles Lindsay was charged with being drunk end disorderly upon the railway near Winton on j the previous day. In his drunkenness defendant Imd committed a considerable amount of damage, and had finished up by going to sleep across the rails. He was fined 40s, with coats £2 6a 2d. Margaret M'Chesney, on remand for manslaughter, was again remanded for eight days. Thuesday, Juxy 17th. John Kingsland was charged under the 21st section of the Municipal Ordinance with allowing offensive matter in a building in his occupation in Tay-street. The case was dismissed, the Bench haying no jurisdiction, certain action having first to be taken by the Municipality. Defendant applied for costs, which were refused. Mortimer Sishon, George Saunders, and John Pay were each fined ss, and 6s 61 costs, for I allowing animals to stray within the town boundaries ; and X'&ontas Smith for the like offence (2 horses), 10s, and 9a costs. Lock v. White. — This was a claim for £3 12s, the amount of a contract for clearing an acre of land at Winton, and for two cords of firewood. Mr Wade for plaintiff, and Mr Macdonald for defendant. The defence was that the contract had not been completed. Several witnesses were called, and judgment wan given for plaintiff for £3, with costs £3 12s.