RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Friday, San. 5. (Befqre G. G. FitzGerald, Esq., R.M.)

West Coast Times, Issue 95, 6 January 1866, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Friday, San. 5. (Befqre G. G. FitzGerald, Esq., R.M.)

Dnu.VK.utDs.— John Curtis, for being drunk and very violent whon arrested, was fined 20s or 48 hours imprisonment. Joseph Brain, for the Bfinio ofTunco, -was similarly dealt with. Cn.vnan of Mcjipeb. — George Stowart was brought up on suspicion of murdering his wife. Inspector Broliam requested a remand pending tbo verdict of tho coroner's jury who sat on tho Into dnquiry, which wns not con* eluded. Mr South, who appeared for tho prisoner, did not object to tho remand, but requested tho rangistrato to accept bail, which tho prisoner was prepared to olTer to any amount. Tho magistrate said ho could not accept bail for this offence, but granted tho remand appliod for. Tho prisoner, beforo leaving tho dock, asked tho magistrato who would tako chargo of his pluco. It was loft unprotected, and contained furniture ns woll as clothes and other things, and thoy woro loft unsecured. On tho previous duy ho had spokon to tho Inspoctor of Polico on tho subject, who, in roply, only said, " Nonsense, groat uonsonso." Evon the uso of pon, ink, and paper was rofused him, though ho had askod tho sergeant for them tliroo or four times, so ho had no means of communicating with liis frionds or making any dofonco. Ho wished to Biibpcenu a lady who livod noxt door, but had not been able to do it through tho manner in which ho had boon treated. Tho magistrato said that ho should have what ho required, and tho prisoner was removed. AbUSXVB AUli TUIIKATUNINO LANGUAGE. — Donald Potter was charged with using abusive and threatening language- to Mr Smith on tho 3rd insfc.. Mr Oakos appoared for compluinant, Mr Campbell for tho dofonco. Mr Smith said that on Thursday last tho defendant camo to him and presontod an order for payment of monoy from Invorcargill. Ho dc« clined to par it because it was not a dobt of his own, and on that, defondant usod tho language complained of, and threatened personal violouco whon he got liira (plaintiff) outside Other ovidonco corroborutivo of tho statomonfc of oomplaiuant was also given, aud dofoudunt was fined 40s aud costs.

A similar charge woo brought by Mrs Carter, of the Steam Paokot Hotel, against Mrs Smith. Mr South appoarod for tho coinplainnnfc and Air Caippbcll for tbo defendant. Complainant stated that lust Monday ovoning slio wont to Mias Edith Palmoreton's outertuinmont, and on coming out sho mot dofondaut, who aaid, " Thoro goes mr husband's old hag," moaning hor (witness). Oompluinant's daughter was with nor at tlio time. Dofondant met complainant again, and addressed a still moro offensive expression to the latterY Dofondaiit had for sotno timo atmoyod her with language- of tho samo character, and it was solely to obtain protection that . sho now came to tho court. — Elizabeth Ann Sheldon, daughter of complainant by a former marriage, corroborated i this evUoneo, and also proved that tho dofomlunt had ou tho samo dato usod most foul and abusive language to her as woll a» to hor mothor. At tho time whon sho usod this lauguogo to wituoas, tho latter was staud* ing at tho door, aud thoro woro a number of mon standing rouud within hearing. — In dofonco, Mr Campbell eallod a witness uamed Edwurd fyiinlau Au«Mh, who tai^ that Uq \va« with tU°, 4sftu<tant on the night wVon th<i

language was laid to hard been used, aud sworo that the namo of Mrs Carter was not used, though ho admitted that vrhon some females wero passing Mrs Smith said, " Thera noes my husband's fancy picco." Ho wont; to tho vos3cl of defendant's husband, tho lona, from tho thoatro.— The magistrate fined defendant 4Os. Obstructing a Pubmo Thobouohfark— Richard Reeves was charged with obstructing a thoroughfare ; but tho cuao was dismissed. Bkbaoh ov tub Pkaoe— Robert Martin pleaded guilty to committing a breach of tho peace, by atrikiug ono of tho ridors at the last South Spit Races, and was fined 2Cto.

OIVIFj OKSKi,

Thirlebcok v. Ritchie and Co- Mr O'Loughlin for the plaintiff, Mr South for the defendants^ This was n claim of LIOO for work and labor" done by plaintiff in raising tho ateiiner Waiporn. Tho wholo question was ,as to what the rate of wages should be, tho defendants admitting that the work had been done, and paying L 64 into court, in full satisfaction. Aftor a very long investigation, judgment was given for 1/80 and

Morisou v. Moir and Staito— Mr South for tho plaintiff, Mr O'Loughlin for the defence. This was an aotion brought to recover tho sum of L7B On 6d, for goods sold by defendants on account of the plaintiff. The circumstances of the case were as follows : — The plaintiff brought down certain goods in the Maid of the Yarrn, amongst which were a quantity of potatoos. The potatoes w^ere wotted with salt water, but, with other tiling, were stored in the defendants' store, and the defondan's wero requested by the plaintiff to sell them, for cash. Till that time tho phintiff represented the potatoes ns sound, though wet, and he instructed the defendants to sell them with the other goods for cash only. The potatoes tto., weio disposed of, but on being delivered were proved in a good many instances to be thoroughly unsound, and in some casc3 absolutely rotten. The consequence was, that the purchaser though fully prepared to pay cash for sound potatoes declined to pay for the damaged onos, and the defendants accordingly wished to deduct the nllowanco they had been obliged to make from tho account siiles of all the goods. This the plaintiff refused to allow, as ho considered (hat defendants should' have obtained cash beforo the goods were allowed to leave the store. In reply to this, defendants said that though credit was unknown in Hokitika, cash wns nob demanded in ordinary cases till goods wero delivered, und when a demand was made for cash in these instances tho potatoes wero 1 found to be noither in accordance with the guarantee given by tho defendants to the pur. chasers, nor with tho statemunt of plaintiff to them (the dofeudant3) on which statement they sold. The damage of tho potatoes, unit the refusal of the purchasers to pay for them was fully proved. Defendants in full settlcinont had paid LG3 10s into Court, and tho difference was the sum allowed by them to other persons. k verdict was givon for tho defendants, with costs. The Court then adjourned. %