MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Globe, Volume VI, Issue 686, 31 August 1876, Page 2

MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, August 31. (Before G. L. Mellish, Esq, R.M.) Drunk and Disorderly.—l wo inebriates, who had been remanded for medical treat? nient, were brought up and discharged. Miscellaneous.--William Gittons, suinmoned for permitting a horse to wander at large, was fined ss. For being absent from their cabs, R. Bowen, G. Green, H. M. Goodyear, and John Goodyear, were each fined 10s. An adjourned case against James Moore, for being absent from his horse and vehicle, was called on, and dismissed. Breach of Publichquse Ordinance.—M. Geoghegan, holder of a wine and beer license, was charged with having sold beer in hig premises, East belt, without supplying other refreshments. Mr Thomas appeared for defendant James Watt stated that on the evening of the 16th ult he had a glass of beer iii defendant's plapc, and brought a bottle of beer away with him. . Shortly after he left the house he met a constable, who spoke to him about the bottle of beer. In crossexamination by Mr Thomas, witness stated that he told Geoghegan, after asking once or twice, that he would let him have the bottle if he would not split on him. He told defendant he wanted the beer for supper. He was not in the house the night before and refused a diink. Mr Thomas said he had not been instructed about the glass of beer having been served to the witness. Fined £5, and 6s witness's expenses,

Permitting Gambling.—J. W. Morton was charged with having permitted gambling to be carried on in his licensed house, Morton's Hotel on 15th August. Defendant did not appear and a fine of £5 was inflicted. Jhrowing Stones.—Patrick Howard and Kate Howard, a little boy and girl not much higher than the table were charged with throwing stones on 23rd August at William Petley's premises. Complainant said that the children were in the habit of annoyiug his family, and had broken two panes of glass in a frame. From a statement made by the parents of defendants, complainant and his wife had called the children " dirty Irish pigs." The evidence altogether showed that the parties are neighbors and the elders had had a misunderstanding some time since. Ordered to pay the damage 9s and costs 9s. Forgery and Uttering.—Robert J. Thomas was brought up on a writ of Habeas Corpvs from Dunedin to answer the charge of having forged the name of William Wilson to a cheque for £6 3s 6d drawn on the Union Bank of Australia, and also with having uttered the same. Jame 3 Feathers, proprietor of Feathers' Hotel, Addington, stated that about the 21st June last he saw the accused at his place. He asked witness if he had seen a man of a description which he gave him. Knew him as having been in the detective force, and accused told him he was still in the force. After this accused asked him if he could cash a small cheque for him, which he did. The amount of the cheque was £6 3s 6d drawn on the Union Bank of Australia. The cheque produced is the f same. Witness presented it at the bank, and it was dishonored, William Wilson, merchant, called stated that the signature to the cheque produced was not his, nor anything like it. Had never authorised accused to sign any cheques for him. There were several other William Wilsons in the provinces, but he did not know their signatures. To the Bench—Witness did not bank at the Union Bank, and always signed his cheques Wm. Wilson and Co. J. S. D'Emden, clerk in the Union Bank of Australia, stated that the cheque produced had been presented at the bank, but was not paid. There was no such account at the bank. Detective Neill stated that he had presented the cheque produced at all the banks in Christchurch, and received a reply " Signature not known." Had often seen accused's writing. The signature to the cheque was in his handwriting. Mr Feathers, re-called, stated that when accused asked him to cash the cheque he told him it was signed by a good mark, and made use of the name by which Mr Wilson is sometimes known. If witness must use the exact words accused said the cheque had been signed by " Cabbage Wilson." After the evidence had been read over, accused, in reply to the Bench, said he had nothing to say at present, and was committed to take his trial at the next Criminal Sessions of the Supreme Court. Assault.—Philip McGaurlick was charged with assaulting Margaret McGinn, on the 19th August. Mr Thomas appeared for the complainant, and Mr Loughnan for defendant. It appeared from the evidence that the parties are neighbours at the Sandhills, near New Brighton, and for some time past have not been living on very neighbourly terms. On the day named they had some words, and defendant roughly pushed complainant off his land, on which she had trespassed, and kicked her once while in the act of pushing her, After lengthy evidence had been given, and counsel had addressed the Bench, his Worship said no provocation would justify a man in assaulting a woman. Defendant would be fined 40s, and 6s costs.

Protection of Earnings,—On the application of Mr Jameson an order for protection of her earnings was granted to Mrs Mary Jane Pugh against her husband John Pugh. An order was also given allowing applicant to have the custody of her three children, and defendant was ordered to pay 10a per week towards their support. Trespassing in Pursuit op Game.— Thomas Cox charged with trespassing on Templar's Island in pursuit of game, was fined 20s. Breach op Naval Training School Act. —Emma Goodall was summoned for failing to contribute towards the support of her son at the Naval Training School. In reply to the Bench —Defendant said she had 10s a week income, and did needle work, with which she endeavored to support herself and two children. His Worship said he would allow the case to stand over for a week, and in the meantime enquiries would be made. Unregistered Dogs.—Samuel Pearson and Thomas Forbes, for being the owners of unregistered dogs for the current year, were each fined 20s. Affiliation.—Robert Parkes was summoned for failing to contribute towards the support of his illegitimate child, of which Margaret Kyle is the mother. Mr Izard appeared for the complainant, and Mr jToughhan for the defendant. The paternity of the child was admitted, but defendant held a release under seal, which he had received on payment of £lO. Mr Izard cited 29 LJ, Vic vii and viii, showing that the payment' of the money having been made j without the sanction of his Worship, and the ! child how shown to be destitute, it was within his Worship's discretion to grant an order to the mother for its maintenance.! Mr Loughnan argued contra, and contended that the payment of the money, under deed of release, was an absolute estoppel, and placed the case outside the jurisdiction of his Worship. His Worship held with Mr Loughnan that the deed was an estoppel, and put the case outside his jurisdiction. He co'uld not make any order. Mr Izard gave notice of appeal. ' The defendant here became very violent, and Jaid the infant which she had been holding in her arms, on the floor of the court, saying the father could take it and the other two outside, as she would not. She then left the Court, and as she continued to be very violent and refused to take the child his Worship ordered her to be locked up for twenty-four hours. Transfer of Licence.—A transfer of the license of the Hororata Hotel from John Cook to Thomas Napier was granted.

LYTTBLTON. Thursday, August 31. (Before W. Donald, Esq., H.M.) Refusal of Duty.—William Barnes and James Allison, seamen belonging to the schooner Hiae Moa, were charged by the captain of that vessel with this offence. Ordered on board. Continued Disobedience of Lawful Commands. —James Hooley, a seaman belonging to the ship Halcione, on remand, was charged with this offence. MrH. N. Nalder appeared for the accused. The mate gave evidence to the effect that on August Bth

accused refused to go up and grease a topmast down without a lanyard, whereon he was put in irons and confined in the cabin water-closet for a week. He was allowed out an hour every evening. The floor of the closet was damp, and he slept on his own bed, placed on some straw, in the closet. The size of the closet was 7ft x 3ft. It was ventilated by a port-hole, The closer had not been used for some time before. Ah for meat, he had full allowance for two days: the next day he had half allowance of meat; lifter this he had nothing but bread and water; he had as much bread and water as lie could eat and drink. At the end of a week accused turned to, on being promised that he would be discharged on his arrival in Lyttelton. There was a medical man or. board. Accused did not complain of treat ment. He told accused on Tuesday last that the dirty work on board the ship would havp to be done before he got his discharge. He then refused to work any more, and said he would go ashore and consult the Magistrate. By the Bench—Greasing down the mast was a part of the man's regular duty, he had had a gasket for two hours in the morning and had only greased 2ft. I never heard of anything so ridiculous as the man refusing to grease the mast without a lanyard. Accused had been suffering from rheumatic gout. The master of the ship gave further evidence and read the extracts from the log bearing on the subject. By Bench—l consider the application for a gasket unreasonable. I have greased down masts dozens of times myself without a gasket. The water closet was a batter place to sleep in than the forecastle; several of the crew said they wished they could sleeptbere— A seaman named Laurensen gave evidence to the effect that accused was ill during the passage, and at times unfit to work or to keep his legs. Another seaman gave similar evidence. Both when cross examined bj Captain Croker said they had never heard of a gasket being used in greasing down a topmast, but that prisoner was at times unfit to go aloft and sometimes had to stagger from stauncion to stanchion to reach his berth in the forecastle. Thisconcluded the evidence. Mr H. N. Nalder put in discharges of prisoner from several of Her Majesty's ships, and also from several merchant vessels, their discharges were, with one exception, most favorable. After the Bench had been addressed at length by Mr Nalder, and subsequently by the Captain, judgment was deliveied. Accused was committed to gaol for fourteen days, the Bench remarking there was no doubt the man had been contumacious in refusing duty, but that as he had been confined some time already he would only give him a fortnight instead of six weeks.