From Western Post, 16 February 1861: Friday, February 15. Before E MARLAY and M H LYONS, Esqrs, JPs A GOOD RIDDANCE Elizabeth PIPER was brought up for being drunk and using obscene language in the public streets. Constable MILLER said he took her in custody yesterday morning for lying in a state of intoxication and using language unfit for publication. Chief Constable HARDY said he had known prisoner two years as a most disorderly character. She had been in custody on a charge of felony, and there was a case at the present time pending against her. She had been sentenced to Bathurst for twelve months, and had since her discharge been before the Bench ten or twelve different times. Prisoner earnestly pleaded to be excused this time; she was desirious to go and get her head dressed, and would promise never to go back to her husband again, who had been the cause of her present trouble, he having thrown a quart of milk at her. The Bench said that she was such an incorrigible offender that htye would send her to Bathurst for two years, where she would be taken care of. T E ANDREW, boot maker, was charged with being a prisoner of the Crown at large. Chief Constable HARDY said from information he had received he was induced to ask prisoner this morning how long he had been away from Cockatoo Island. He replied three years. In reply to a question respecting his district, he said he had done his time, and had his pass, but had lost it. He then took prisoner into custody, and had written to Sydney for information. Case adjourned. ANDREWS to appear when summoned. Mr A McPHAIL, of the Castlereagh River, appeared to answer a charge for furiously driving in the public streets. Constable CAMPBELL swore that a little after 9 o'clock this morning McPHAIL was spurring his horse and urging it at its full speed. He followed him to Market Lane, and took him into custody. Mr BRODRIBB, for defence, contended that it was necessary to prove that some one had actually been in danger. The Bench overruled the objection, and asked McPHAIL what he had to say to the charge? He replied he was a scrubber from the interior, and was not accustomed to a town life. He could not see that much harm had been done. The Bench said that they would discharge him this time, which rather surprised the defendant, who wildly exclaimed, "What! me, sir?" Mr H TEBBUTT appeared upon summons under the Landlord and Tenants' Act to show cause why he should not vacate the premises occupied by him in Gladstone-street. Mr BRODRIBB and Mr CLARKE (for TEMPLETON) appeared for Messrs. M'ARTHUR and Co., Mr James for Mr. TEBBUTT. Mr. WOOD deposed that that he was instructed by M'ARTHUR and Co. in March last to proceed to Mudgee for the purpose of taking possession of all property named in a bill of sale which he produced, and which was put in as evidence..(missing). writing for the delivery of the property, and obtained possession of the store and stock. Respecting the dwellinghouse and post-office, he told Mr TEBBUTT that it would be necessary for him to become a tenant, and agreed to let it to him at a rental of 1s a week. For a certain period Mr TEBBUTT paid the rent, but could not say exactly how many payments had been made. Mr MACAFEE, of Sydney, said he was in Mudgee arranging business matters with TEBBUTT and GULLEY. On the 2nd February a private account was presented to Mr TEBBUTT, which contained a charge for thirteen weeks' rent. After certain reductions were made he settled with Mr TEBBUTT by giving him a cheque for the balance. He then served him with notice to quit the premises. Mr TEBBUTT was greatly indebted to his firm. Mr WOODs recalled: Was present when the items were struck out. Would swear that 13s for rent was not one of them. Had at various times demanded the rent from TEBBUTT and was generally paid. G TAYLOR proved the execution of a deed assigning the property, and which contained a description of the premises occupied by Mr TEBBUTT. Mr JAMES, for the defence, first applied for a nonsuit on the ground that the serving of the notice had not been proved, which being overruled, he put Mr TEBBUTT in the box, who swore that he had never paid WOODS a single penny on account of rent for either house or post-office. Neither had he ever arranged to become a tenant. He would not swear that the words "paid H TEBBUTT" on one of the papers put in was in his own handwriting. The mortgage money had long ago been paid to M'ARTHUR and Co. Mr MACAFEE recalled: Would most positively swear that the account for £45 12s 1d was accepted by Mr TEBBUTT in his presence, and that it included the 13s due for rent, which Mr TEBBUTT never disputed, who read the various items over int eh account before receiving the balance. He again repeated that not the least objection was made to the 13s for rent. The Magistrates retired into their private room for the purpose of going through the evidence. On their return they said they both agreed that there was not sufficient evidence, and that they must dismiss the case. ***END*** Annette Piper Please note: Every effort has been to transcribe the above information correctly, however errors may have inadvertently been made. Spelling of surnames/places as appears in original.