MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 227, 18 June 1908, Page 11

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

POLICE CASES.; '

! ; ■■ (Before! 5J.r. W. G. Riddell, S.M.)

I CHARGE 6? ASSAULT'AND ROBBERY. Edniurid Mackie was charged (I).witli haying on dr ibout May 7 at Wellington assaulted and; robbed one Samuel .Julliffo of a gold 'watch (valued at £50, and (2) with the theft : ;of a' [gold watch valued at £50 from . the: person !of Samuel Julliffe. - .dhief Detective M'Grath conducted the ease for tljo prosecution,. and Mr. Toogood appeared for.lho defence. Samuel julliffe, farmer, of Johnsonville. deposed that he.was in Wellington on M»y <> and was ih[ Hunter Street at about 6.80 that evening. Witness had been drinking, and was going ito'vards the Pier Hotel, when he '/ was knocked down by. a man, who struck mm oyer,the eye ind took his gold watch. Alter the assault tlie man ran away. Witness could not .recognise; the niau again. The efteci/ or the' fall was ! to lay witness-up for several days. ''The ratch (produced) was tuo; one taken, from ivitness. It was worth about £50. ' . 1.: " : ~ Re-examined by Chief Dctective Jl farath, witness did not remember tho man actually taking the watch. He .was positive he had it just before he iyas knockcd down. • James Hogan, barman, of the Hotel Cecil, ■ stiitod that accused came into the bar of the hotel .. on Slay 8, and asked witness if ho wanted* tojjbiiy a watch as he (accused) had a good onoffor sale, and was hard up. Tho man >vcn£ away and got the watch,/ and showed . it to who purchased it for £5.- Acciisctl said the watch was presented tno him by|a ; friend,'or a brother ,_ in England, v Accusedgave'wittiess. a receipt .(produced)'for;'£o inpayment. gold watch \ '(produced), i ■■■. ' : • Detective Cassells deposed that ho saw accused on board: the steamer Putiki on Juno 11, and ; asked 'hik-'-iyhero ho' got tho watch ■ ho had -sold to--tho barman at. the Hotel Cecil. Accused said he bought it at the Pier ''Hotel 'from a man named Wall, a steward on tho Mamuri.' Later accused made i. 'a ,statement, to tho effect that he was a cook on the Pufciki; and had purchased tho watch from Wall, ■but,biid received no receipt for tho money.He sold the watch to Hogan at tho Hotel Cecil. Under' cross-examination witness stated that there was' a man named. Wall on tho ' Mainari,which was on her way'to England. ; George..Crawfoi;(l, clc-rk in Levin and Co.'s • 'shipping office, agents for the'Mamari, stated that th/"Maniari- left Wellington for London . on April 24.1a5t,.. Accused->plea:dgd not guilty, and was com-mitted-'to" flip Supreme Court for trial. : Bail .was allowed in the sum of £40 and two suftties' of *£20 each. ALLEGED THEFT. >Wm. Gunn Mackay was" charged (1) with oil or about June 3 at Wellington stealing' seven/ladies' handbags, valued at £4 18s. Gd., • • the property of somo persdn or persons unkW.rn, and''(2j with on or about. May 6 stealing from 'in port' ten pairs of com- ' binatioils and eight pairs of men's woollen ,N . drawers, valued at £7 145., tho property of Ross and Glendining. On tho application of Mr. Jackson, a re- ■ maildUntil Wednesday next was granted, bail; being allowed in accused's own. recognis' ance of £10Q.' .> ,i. . . ... COMMITTED FOR TRIAL. The bearing of the.chargo against Patrick Ryan, of, haying on.'May ,30 _at .-Wellington indecently assaulted a certain , female was cor.cludecf. -Accused pleaded not and • waii Committed to; tlio Supreme Court for trial.;... : ' ' ' ' On application of Mr. I'. W. Jackson, •bail was allowed in the sum of £40 and two sureties of £20 each.. - . 1: . , : .' -. ;.. MAINTENANCE. ' ~ -Tho-adjourned case in which Alfred Wm. Pouting was charged with failing to provide for the maintenance of his three children ; was concluded. After hearing additional cvi- ■ dence, his Worship pointed out ■ that -do- •' fondant was liable for tho maintenance of • his children, and on his own showing had no suitable place to tako them to at present. The children appeared to >,bo satisfied with the.place_thoy wore in now, but 1 the-Court would pbint. out that ono of the children , was under the age of six years, and it was • a matter for counsel to seo that tho woman' who had charge of this child complied with the regulations of tho Infant-Life ,Protcci • tion Act. An-ordor would bo itfado against defendant to pay Bs.' c per week in respect of each of the children, tliat amount to bo paid to.': the; woman with whom the childrenwere ' at; presont living so. long as they are With • her. ■ ■/ ; .; Defendant: Well! your Worship, I won't do it.: ; I'li go to gaol first. , I have done' no- . thing w:rongi and'l- don't''sea ' why my be Icept'. away frbih me. His Worship : I advise you to tako legal defendant, beforo making rash state'-' Dients. , . .- ■ •, - • ( Defendant proceeded to .address the Bench, ' agaiiv, but his' Worship intimated that ho was not going to arguo tho'matter.' Mr. .P. W. Jackson appeared for applicants.' •, BY-LAW CASES. John Lane,was convicted and fined 10s. ana costs 75., in default 24 hours'' im- , prisoninent, for driving a vehicle around tho corner of Lambton Quay and Willis Street at other than a walking pace. ' Jamos T. Martin pleaded riot guilty to' a chargo'of failing to comply with the regulations contained; in the City by-law's governing the; erection of signboards. Evidence showed that -tho signboard in question was erected in Manners : Street as a means of drawing attention to a local industry exhibit in the . window, of the Union Clothing Co. Mr. Doyle, who prosocnted, pointed i out that although the structure was only a temporary ono Jhie had explained that it must bo removed; in order to prevent others following , the same example. After heaving evidence his Worship held that a technical breach had been comimtted, and said defendant would bo convicted without costs. Owners of unregistered dogs were penalised' as -follow:—John Toft's, ; £l. and costs 75.; John Sandman and Chas. Smith, 55., and costs 75.; and John Beck, Thomas J. Gardiner, and AVm. Hutchinson, ordered to pay pay. Court cost-3, 7s. For ■ allowing horses to wander, Herbert Martin and Arthur L. Williams wero each convicted and .fincd 205., and costs 75., and J. Burrow wa3 convicted and ordered to pay Court costs, 7s. J'or .carrying on business as a hawker without haying a license, Arthur Jones was convicte.d and fined 10s. and costs 7s. CarOlollor was convicted and fined 10s. and costs 7s. for allowing offensive rubbish to remain on his promises;* MISCELLANEOUS. Sis, first offenders for drunkenness Were dealt with.- One, who failed to appoarj was convicted and fined;-10s., in ,default 24 hours' imprisonment, _ four ..'othor3'»- wero convicted and fined as., in.default24'hours' imprisonment,'and another; was convicted and discharged.