■fraSß sen" Act in force to prevent it. H( went to' Ciive, and saw the defendani $iili.the dog. He admitted that he was the fter'sqfr who was complained 1 of by Mi Hill. He had t'lie dog in front of him pt the horse when witness saw him. He (the constable) saw no marks of ill-usag« on the dog when he saw him some Route afterwards. The defendant stated that he wa£ driving a flock of sheep on the day in question, when some gentlemen broke through the sheep, causing five of them to get away. He sent his dog after the sheep, but he would not go. He hit him three times lightly with his boot. The dog then ran home. If he did not chastise (lie dog occasionally he would be useless for sheep. In reply to the Bench, Constable Motley stated that he knew the defendant very well, and that he had the reputation of being a quiet and inoffensive man. Mr Hill here came forward and said that he had no desire to have a fine inflicted on defendant, but merely to let him see that he could not ill-treat his dog with impunity. The defendant was discharged, the Bench expressing its opinion that defen dant had evidently treated the dog in what he considered a proper manner. BREACH OP BYE-LAWS. •Nathaniel Bishop was charged with having left his hackney carriage unat tended in Waghorne-street, on the 13th March. Defendant pleaded guilty. The constable stated that defendant was absent from the vehicle for half-an hour in the public-house. Defendant told him he had forgotten all about his trap and wanted him (the constable) to look over the offence. He was fined 5s and costs 7s.
HOME GOSSIP.
