RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2033, 15 April 1890, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka—Monday, April 14, 1890. [Before 0. A. Wray, Esq., R.M.] BREACH OP THE PEACE. Geo. L. Collins and Tama Waaka (native), two lads, were charged on the information of Constable Egan with committing a breach of the peace in the public street on April 6th.' The offence was admitted. . Constable Egan stated that on the night of Sunday, April 6th, he was on duty in the Main Street, Temuka. There was a crowd of larrikins outside the Salvation Army, and he had to disperse them. Subsequently they went to the rear of some premises near, and the two defendants, who were surrounded by other larrikins, started fighting. He did not intend at first to lock them up, but they treated his remonstrances so coolly, and be had previously had occasion to’ speak to them, that he thought it would do them good. When on the way to the lock-up the Maori had said, “If we had not been stopped I think I could have done you.’ 1 Collins was the “ boss ” of a fighting crowd, and was very unruly. Collins had been locked up for about two hours, but Waaka all night. The former had been bailed out by his uncle. Henry Williams, uncle of the boy Collins, said that he was a good lad except when he got knocking about at night, He wtuld be more strict in future. His Worship advised him to keep him at home as much as possible, and asked if the lad was earning wages. Witness replied in the affirmative. The defendant Waaka stated in reply to the bench that he was digging potatoes for Mr Ackroyd, and earned 6d a bag. Sometimes he dug four and sometimes five bags a day. His Worship severely cautioned the boys, and fined them 5s each, UNREGISTER SD DOGS, David Charteris was charged on the information of Edward Pilbrow with having two unregistered dogs in his possession. that he had since ascertained that one dog had already been registered by another person, and Charteris had registered the other since the information had been laid.—Eined 10s in respect of one dog. A. W. Gaze was charged with having three unregistered dogs.—lnformant stated that two of the dogs had been registered, the third he was in- -

formed had been given away, but he had seen it frequently about defendant’s residence,—Defendant, on oath, stated that the dog in dispute had not been in his possession for over two months. It had been bred by himself, and there was some difficulty in keeping the dog away from its old home. It was sent away at the first convenient opportunity. Its new owner had promised to register it.—Defendant was fined 10s each in respect of two dogs.

John James Heap was charged with having two unregistered dogs in his pessession.—After hearing the evidence the defendant was fined 10s, one dog having been disposed of some months ago. H, Smallridge, who did not appear, was fined 10s for one dog, which had been registered with costs on Saturday. Eussell Roberts was charged with having two dogs in his possession without having the same registered.— Informant stated that his attention bad been directed to two dogs, which he was told belonged to defendant. They were hanging about the yard of the Wallingford Hotel, where defendant usually lodged. Did not know for certainty that the dogs were defendant’s property, but assumed so, as they followed him, and when he saw them continually following him judged them to be his.—The defendant, sworn, said that at the time the information was laid be only owned one dog, since registered. A dog of his brother-in-law’s had followed him, but it had been sent to Amberley in March. Had paid the cost of the summons in this instance, and understood that the case would be withdrawn. Only understood that he would have to prove the ownership of the other dog. He called Constable Morton, who said that the informant had asked him to withdraw those cases where fees had been paid. Witness said he could not do so without permission of the Court. Advised him to ask the Resident Magistrate to allow that to be dene. His Worship said that in that case he should only inflict a nominal penalty. The fine in the present case would be Is, and the same to apply to Charteris and Smallridge. A case against W. Radford was adjourned by consent for a week. civil CASES. Ann Johnstone v. Edward Savage —Claim 20s, balance of amount due for nursing fees. Mr Cathro for plaintiff. Judment by default for amount claimed, with 7s costs. 0. 0. Matthews v, P. Q-lasson Claim £4 4s, for service of a mare by Betrayer. Judgment by default for amount claimed and costs. Dr Hayes v. R. Eenton—Claim £l4 3s. Mr Salmond for plaintiff. Defendant’s wife had forwarded £7 on account, and it was arranged that the case should be adjourned for a week. The Court then rose.