PETERSFIELD.
Agent-Mr. G. DUPLOCK.
PETTY SESSIONS.—Tuesday—Present Sir J. C. Jervoise, Bart., M.P., J. Bonham-Carter, Esq., M.P., Sir A. K. Macdonald, Bart., John Waddington, Esq., and Major Briggs.
— James Ellis was convicted of using wires for taking game, in the parish of Catherington, on Thursday, July 7th. Fined 5s. and 8s. costs.
— William Etherington, Frank Etherington, and George Porter were charged with stealing apples from an orchard belonging to Mr. W. Weeks, at Eastmeon, on Sunday, July 24th. The evidence in this case being barely sufficient to sustain the charge, and Mr. Weekes having stated that his object in bringing it forward was not to punish the boys, but to put a stop to the practice, they were discharged with a caution.
— Robert and Arthur Porter and William Soal were charged with a like offence, at Buriton, on Sunday, July l7th. This case was clearly proved by P.C. W. Rolfe, and, a previous conviction having been recorded against Soal, he was adjudged to pay a fine of 5s.; the two Porters were fined 1s. each,—costs, amounting to 9s. 6d., to be paid by the three in equal shares.
— Edmund Harris applied for a warrant of ejectment against Anne Welch. Defendant did not appear. Complainant stated that he let a cottage to defendant about eighteen months ago at a weekly rent of 1s. 3d., which she had paid up to last May, since which she had refused to pay or to leave. He had given her verbal notice to quit, but, in order to make quite sure of being right, he had also caused a written notice to be served on her, but he had not brought a copy of such notice with him, nor was the person who served it present.—The magistrates informed him that, as he had given a notice in writing, a copy of that document must be produced, and the service must be proved on oath.—The case was, therefore, adjourned till the next bench day.
— Mr. Adams applied on behalf of several ratepayers whose appeals against the rating of the Assessment Committee stood for to-day, requesting an adjournment, on the ground that, as the new act, which came into operation on the 1st inst., required that 21 days notice of appeal should be given, and as the present special session for hearing appeals had been fixed some months before such act was, in contemplation, there had been no opportunity of complying with the terms of the act by giving the required 21 days’ notice, or by making a previous application to the Assessment Committee, as required by the new act—After a good deal of discussion the cases were adjourned to Tuesday, September 13th.