RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Westport Times, Volume V, Issue 784, 4 March 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

FIiIDAY, Mabch 3. (Before J. Giles, Esq., E.M.) WINSTANLEY V. NOLAN. In this case the complainant, who holds the office of Postmaster at Westporfc, had laid two informations against the defendant, charging him with a breach of the Postal Regulations. Mr Pitt appeared for the defence. The complainant stated that he appeared as agent for the Postmaster-General, and had been instructed to bring the present action. The first information was laid under the 31st section of the A3t, and the defendant, who is master of the steam-tug Lioness, was thereon charged with having left Westport on January 22nd, without serving the twenty-four hours' notice to the postal authorities required under the Act. The second information was laid under the 25tb section, wherein the defendant was charged with having on the same date failed to subscribe the declaration ordered by the Act, having regard to the delivery of the mails, &c. The following evidence was called in support of the informations : iSamuel Alexander Leech : I am Harbormaster at Weotport. On referring to my journal, I find that the p.s Lioness arrived at Westport, from Hokitika, about eleven o'clock on the niglit of Sunday, the 22nd January, 1871. She towed in the schooner Northern Light, from Melbourne, and left again for south about midnight, remaining here about an hour. By Mr Pitt: The Lioness is not employed otherwise than as a tug. I have known her to convey passengers, but on no occasion to carry cargo. The steamers Kennedy and Murray arrived here from Nelson about the same time, and sailed the following night. By the Bench: The Lioness visits the port about six times a year, and has done so for the last three and a-half years. I have not known her deviate from the regular plan of remaining half-an-hour or an nour at Westport, unless on one or two occasions when detained by bad weather. W. S. Munday, Collector of Customs, was called, but did not appear. His Worship explained that Mr Munday had been unable to attend, having important public business to transact, and having been subpoenaed but shortly before the sitting of the Court, the Bench thought that the notice was too short to compel his attendance.

Thomas Watson, agent for Spence Bros, and Co., owners oi the Lioness, stated that ho received a mail. from the p.s. Lioness on the night of Sunday, January 22nd, which he delivered at the Post Office the following morning, shortly after nine o'clock. He entered the vessel inwards with the captain, and at the same time cleared her outwards. Did not get o.ie of the usual postal notices, it being late at night, and no one about the Post Office. The steamer, on previous occasions, has arrived in time to enable her to obtain the notice. The Postmaster has always dispensed with the twenty-four hours notice, and has accepted half-ah-h'our as sufficient. He was willing to admit that no notice -was given, at least so far as he knew. By Mr Pitt: It is customary for the boat to leave in half-an hour, or within an hour after arrival. 1 went with Mr Elliott, of the Customs, to the Post-office to obtain a notice, but for the reason stated, could find no one. There were two boats, the same night, in the river going South, and I did not think it worth while to go out to Mr Winstanley's country residence. Mr Winstanley said that he had no further evidence. Mr Pitt claimed that the information be dismissed, on the ground that no evidence had been produced to support them. Beyond, the indirect evidence of Mr Watson, who admitted that there had been no notice so far aa he knew, nothing whatever had been proved, and as the defendant had been subjected to the indignity of replying to a penal charge, he should contend, with" out entering into the merits of anv other doience that might be set up, that the informations must in the total absence of evidence, be dismissed. His Honor concurred in the view urged for the defence, and dismissed both informations. An application for the counsel's costs was not acceded to. ROACH V. HOLMES. Mr Home, on behalf of the defendant, who is master of the p.s. Charles Edward, applied for a rehearing of the above case, heard at Westport on Tuesday last, when, in the absence of the defendant, the plaintiff obtained judgment for the sum of £417s, for alleged damage to his boat. The defendant's affidavit was put in. Mr Pitt appeared for the plaintiff, and consented to a rehearing on payment of costs. His Worship decided to take the case on Friday next.

When Paris was found to be too tight a place tor the Bank of Prance the bank was taken to another place — Toulouse. The painter wasn't very far out when he made a village chemist's sign read: —" Physician's prescriptions carefully confounded." Which ? —The following lines were found on a lawyer's table in a court, house after an adjournment of the court: — " Pair woman was made to bewitch; A companion, a'nurse, A blessing, a curse, Fair woman waa made to be—which P"