MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1496, 19 July 1912, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) BETTING CASES. LIVINGSTONE FHnED £20. Reserved judgment was delivered bv Mr U U. Riddell, S.M., at the Ma.iV hates Court yesterday, in the earn Hex v. Liviimstone .Matthew Livin-sbno was charge with hayinjf. on July .1, made a bet with one Voter Sonter in llw licen-ed promises of the Commercial Hotel. The lntoruiatioii was laid under Hub-ttetcm iilTii 2 ' <>f "'° His Worship slated that, from (lie evidence, lie was sati.-iioil that the ) :s t had been made, ; U ,,j jj, (| le <joini)ierc:i:il Hole . JJetendant iidmitled that he was a booAinaker, but had discontinued lo act as such about two years iigo. At present he earned his living by holpii,-; his wife, n ? , was T 110 at the Coininereial ilolel. He did not receive specilia waws for this. Deteclive-Seriscint Cassels .'•tilted that he knew Livingstons (the dolenWant) to be a bookmaker till about ten months a*a. Moreover, hi.?-attitude on the .street about race limes invested (hat he still was one. Detective 'Waldeii said ho was not prepared in swear that the defendant was'a bookmaker still, as he was not cognisant of the man's recent movements. Concerning Mr. ,T. J. M'Grntli's ("conni-pl for defendant) objection that evidence us to acts l:rtween Sonter and accused on June 27 and Julv 2 was irrelevant to the charge of making a bet on July 11, his Worship was of opinion tint it probably was irrelevant, though it was relevant to prove that (he defendant was a bookmaker. In ,the case Diiddy v. Connolly, on June 12, 1912, Mr. ,lu<tite Chapman had said: "A man may be a bookmaker and not a bookmaker'the day before or the day after. A man who acts a.-< a bookmaker is a bookmaker, and it i≤ not necessary to discover when he became one. Evidence may be adduced (o probe tho status of a man', and that is all. That (ividfiice may consist of preparations, acts, declarations, and evaii of acts subscriiient tactile making <if the.bet under consideration. And when the evidence was suflicient lo c-lib'ish the status that status was a proved fact not referable exclusively hi any particular moment or time." Thus, considering the evidence and the decisions in these two eases., his Worship was of opinion that the defendant must ts held to be a bookmaker and to have made the bet with which he was charged. Defendant was convicted and fined .£2O, with costs amounting to 9s. ' Twenty pound is the minimum penalty under the statute.

MARTIN WILLIAM TIER. ' THE ALLEGED XIGHT AFFAIR.. At the Magistrate's Court yesterday, Martin William Tier was charged with breaking and entering into the .shop, of Messrs. Charles Kill and Sons, mercers, Lambton. Quay, Wellington, on the evening of July 11. Tier was further charged \vith having stolen three pairs of silk socks, eight overcoats, and two cans, of :i total viiliie of X2b Ss. OM., besides 4s. OJd. in money. , Mr. 11. F. O'Lcary appeared for Tier, and Hie sub-inspector prosecuted. ' Ernest Piatchelor, accountant in the cmploy of Messrs. Charles Hill and Son.*, .stated that, on July 11. he wax the last to leave tho shop, uiul when ho left everything was in the usual order. The till was locked, and contained some odd change and stamps. He identified the goods found upon accused am! others which had been wrapped up in a parcel as being the property of his employer, Charles Hill. The valiio of the goods aiiioiiiited approximately to .£25. Edwin .lames Hill, one of the principals of the firm of Charles Hill and Sons, stated that he. was the owner of the goods, and that he did not know accused, who h'ad no right on the promises. Constable Thompson gave evidence as to tho discovery of the alleged burglary. Ho was proceeding along Lambton Quay about 11.30 p.m., when he noticed that the front <loor of Messrs. Hill and Son's shop was closed but unlocked. He entered and saw Tier in the doorway, who, seeing the- constable, exclaimed that ' "ho know when ho was beaten." A struggle ended in the policeman getting Tier out on to the street, and throwing the handcuffing him. Hearing others in the chop, Constable Thompson summoned assistance. A search of tho promises ensued, but. the rest of the gang made their escape out of the back windows on to the Terrace. Sergeant Kelly, who had made an examination of the shop', stated that it was quite evident that others had l;cen there. Various stock was scattered over the lloor, and lying on the floor was a brown paper parcel containing articles mentioned in the charge. A cap was found on a shed roof at the back, close to a window, showing the way by which the fugitives escaped. A ladder at the back gave access to a vacant section leading to the Terrace. Tho accused was formally charged and pleaded not guilty. Ho was committed to the Supreme Court for trial. Bail was allowed in the sum of <£iriO, His "Worship refusing to reduce the amount.'

CHEAP TRIP ON S.S. TAHITI. Louis Shaver and George Brown were charged with travelling on the s.s. Tahiti, tho former from Rarotongo, and the latter from San Trancisco, without, paying thoir fare. They were fined X 5 each, with an alternative of one month's imprisonment.

OTHER CASES. Two first offenders for insobriety weio also dealt with. William John Williams, John Hutton, Owen Kelly, and John Cavnnagh wero convicted and ordered to forfeit two days' pay each for absenting themselves without leave from tho s.s. Zealandic. They were also ordered to pay court costs.

CIVIL BUSINESS. THE UNDEFENDED CASKS.. Iu tbo following oflsw judgment wns given in favour of the plaintiff by default: Spencer Radford v. Victor Hammond, .£0 7s. fid., costs Bs.; Patho Frcres v. Frank Stewart. i:88 3s. Cd., costs M 175.; SeliaeI'er and Co. v. John M'Auliffo, .£1 193. U., costs &>,; Cornelius M'Mtmus v. G. A. M'llvride, £3 103. Id., costs 10s.; ,T. (J. Bains and Co. v. J. W. Wilson, £9 14s. Cd., costs £1 3s. (id.; Commercial Agency, l,td. (assignee) and Collett and Son, f.td. (assignors) v. W. J. lloppy. £1 is., easts .")=.; Vacuum Oil Proprietary, J.ttl., v. F. C. Chaytni-', Jj'2 .Is. Bil., costs 155.; Caselberg ami Co. v. N. ]'. Neilson, £1 7s. lid., co<!(.s 135.; W. 1). Suimiici'R v. Mrs. Frank Wallace, .ir. Js. lflil., cosl> ,i\ :k fid.; "Wm. Itiuloii Pernio v. John Jlra.v. .tl 2s. lid., costs is.: Drower, Fulton mid Co., v. Kallinu'or Bros., Ltd., .G!9 17.«. 10d., c;)sb XI Ms. .UriXiMKNT SUMMONSES. T. Taylor was ordered to pnv .Cfi \~\-. •},\. to Chiirle> Prnll, o.^ijnee'tn \V. .1. Conntr. Ijy August 1. fn tlie cafij in ii-luch the W^llingtnn Cauixcii filiwifid.iez lie* 3(J».fieffl.

Frank Morton, defendant was ordered to pay liie :iitunint by August 7. Mis. (icurge 11. limvsou was onloml to pay .till Jk lid. | 0 Kirkcaldie anil Stains u.v August 1. J. 11. lteyiiolils was ordered to pay .tl Ss. to W. Kinsey liy Aiigu-l 1.

XONSITITIiI). Samuel Hnwan, bulrhcr, claimed lo rccovit Iroin David Presley Mallhew.-. biilehor, the mim ol' ,Ui 55., allc-ed to bo the uiiiouiil duo for goods sold and delivered. In ili'livoruig judgment , , his Worship said (hat when a man claims an. account throu unci a lialt' years old the evidence us to the details of the account arc Iwiiiul to bo stale, and it: is tho plaintilV's fault for allowing the evidence to get stale. The plaintiff was nonsuited with solicitor's fee .£1 Is. Mr. V. 1.. West appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. .1. .r. M'Grath for defendant.

I-AND IN WOODWARD STREET. CLAIM AGAINST T. K. MACffONALD. (Before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) William Henry Edwards, a contractor of .Wellington, asked that au order for the payment of « sum of JUlii Bs. 7d. bo imule against Thomas Kennedy Macdonaid. Edwards had previously obtained judgment against Macdonald. Edwards stated that on January 11 he agreed to purchase a piece of Itiiul in Woodward Street from the defendant, and had paid a deposit of .£IOO, and hud obtained a receipt. Since then he had made frequent applications for the transfer of the land without avail, and the deposit had not been returned to him. Jle understood that the property was now in the hands of mortgagees. Macdonald stated that his accountant was seriously ill, and consequently his atfaivs had become much disarranged. He therefore asked to have (lira ease postponed for three weeks. This was granted. Mr. l'\ Holdsworth appeared for Mr. Edwards.

OTHER CIVIL CASES. Acting as executrix in the estate of William iJavid .lames. .Mrs. £cliua James' claimed .UI2 10s., being the amount oi' a promissory note given by A. \V. of the Surony Studio, the defendant, to plaintiff in lilll. A further claim lor 11s. lid. whs made for interest on the above (iinount. The defomkuit paid XS 'a. lfld. into Court as a full settlement cf the claims.. Alter hearing the evidence his Worship Rave judgment in favour of the lilniutilt' i*r>r the amount paid into Court, plus UK Mr. A'. Ward appeared for the plaintiff, ami Mr. Ueore lor the defendant. Jlrs. Aliee Merry, of 71 Cambridge Terrace, brought an action against Williiin Aslimoro.-u butcher, of Wellington, for the sum of 10s. fld., .-aid to be the cost ul' replacing in a door in her house of which Aslimoro was tenant, mid who ; t was alleged broke the glass. Judgment was given in favour of the plaintiff for the amount claimed. Mr. Pctlierick appeared for the plaintiff, ami Air. Dunn for (lel'piidiiiit. His Worship reserved judgment in the case in which the .sum of ,tY2 17s. 4d. was C'lninipil as damages by Thomas Coverdale. Lower Kiitl, against W. E. Lutz, butcher, of Willis Street. The action arose over the In'i'ukin; of a plnte-ijlnss window in (lid Customhouse Street through a horse and cart coming into contact with it. Negligence in driving was alleged against defendant's driver. This was disputed by defendant. Mr. 0. lieeio appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. K. J. Fitzgibbon for defendant.