Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT. OPENING A FRIEND'S LETTER. FOOLISH ACT. THE JURY OBLIGEJ) TO CONVICT. Elsie Reynolds, a young married woman, who arrived here- late last year from Sydney, appeared in the Supremo Court yesterday in. respect to three charges, which were, in effect, as follows: —(1) That she opened a registered letter addressed to Louie Galloway. (2) That she wilfully delayed the Jotter. (3) That she obtained tho letter by a false pretence, to wit, the forgery of an authority to the' Post Office to receive tho letter. The date of the offences was October 22 of last year, and the parties were at the time living in the one house in Terrace. Previously they were acquaintances in Sydney. His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) presided, and Mr. P. S. K. Macassey represented tho Crown. Mr. J. J. M'Grath defended. Leonard S. Fowler, postal officer, stated in evidence that he had handed the letter out on a written authority being produced. • Louie Galloway, 'who is twenty-two years of age, and was employed in the Victoria Laundry for some time after her arrival from Sydney, said that she did not write or sign the. authority. When witness went home from work on tho evening of October 22, accused told her that there were no letters for her. Witness replied that that was strange, as she expected a letter, and added that she would go to the Post Office and inquire for her mail. Accused then said, "You needn't make a - —- fool of me. If there were any letters there, I would have given them to you," At the Post Office witness discovered that a registered letter addressed to her had been signed for. When she (witness) returned home, accused said that there was a letter there for her, and that she had not given it sooner because she had a reason. The letter was from Mr. Sidney Puffitt, of Sydney. Mr. M'Grath: Did your married sister approve of your communicating with, Mr.'Puffitt? Witness was answering : that there was no harm in letters passingbetween Mr. Puffitt and herself, when His Honour ruled this lino of cross-examination out. 'Frances Rutherford, Miss Galloway's married sister, stated that she had not asked Mrs. Reynolds to open any of her ; .sister's letters. When accused told 'her that she had {opened it, witness remarked that she did not wish to read the letter, and-that accused had now got herself into a nice fix. Tho accused, in the witness-box, stated that sho not aware of having done wrong in signing the authority, or in opening tho letter. She had openod the letter because Mrs. Rutherford asked her to, for tho sake'of tho girl Galloway. The; letter contained £4 18s., the girl's return fare to Sydney. Mr. M'Grath, in addressing the jury, said that the accused was, at most, guilty of an indiscretion. His Honour said that probably the accused had acted with no bad intention. If she had admitted tho charge no Judge would be likely to punish her severely, but in dealing with tho present matters; tho jury had their oath to consider, and tho accused had admitted that sho .had: violated tho law. Of course, the jury could recommend tho accused to mercy. She had not committed a serious crime—she had simply violated tho Post and Telegraph Act. The jury found a verdict of guilty on' all charges,, but with not the slightest criminal intent. His Honour: You mean that, you don't think that she knew that sho was doing wrong. > Tho foreman replied that; that was the position. His Honour thought the verdict a right one. The woman had acted foolishly, but the law had been vindicated, and she ' would bo ordered to appear for sentence if called on. THE CRIME BIAS, DIFFICULT. MAN TO REDEEM. Joseph Croft was tried on charges of 'having stolen a bicycle belonging to Joseph Roberts, and of having received the machine knowing it to have been stolen/ Ho pleaded not guilty, and was not represented by counsel. Mr. P. S. K. Macassey represented the Crown. Mr. Macassey said that about 10.30 on the morning of December 30 last Joseph Roberts left his bicycle outsido a city shop, and it was stolen. Next day he saw the machine outside the shop of one Rosenberg, a cycle repairer, and found that it had been sent there for repair by Joseph Hayvico, a second-hand dealer, m Taranaki Street. Roberts inquired at the dealer's and was informed that Croft had loft the bicycle there. Those particulars were sworn to by witnesses, and the jury, after a retirement of. ten minutes, 'brought in a verdict of guilty. His Honour sentenced prisoner without delay. Croft, he said, had been, declared a habitual criminal more than a year ago, but had been released on probation by tlie Prison Board, who had taken his youth into consideration, and had thought that if given a chance he might lead a different life. He was, however, no sooner out of custody than lie returned to his old habits. Since he had been allowed out of New Plymouth gaol lie had twice been convicted. Such beliaviour was one of the difficulties the Prison Board had to contend against. It looked almost as though it were impossible to redeem men like Croft. He had been given a chance by being allowed out, with a small sum of money —at least £2 —but here lie was in thedook again, with thirteen previous convictions against him. His sentence now would bo twelve months' imprisonment with hard labour, and he would be deemed a habitual criminal. < Croft asked liis Honour if he would order that instead of his (the prisoner's) being returned to New Plymouth | as a habitual criminal at the completion of his twelve months' imprisonment, be should be sent out,of the country. His Honour said that that was a matter for the Prison Board. He remarked that Croft's trouble was that he would not work. I Croft: I have been working ever since I got out. .. I His Honour: Well, then, you had no need to steal. Croft: I know nothing about it. | His Honour: Oh, that won't do. Yon [ are already serving a sentence for another theft.

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

' ■ — THE HOURS OF HOTEL HANDS. Mr. E. W. Burton, S.M., presided over a sitting of. the Magistrate s Court yesterday morning. ■ ' Tho Inspector of Awards (Mr. R. T. Bailey) proceeded against Fanny Pool, licensee of the Empire Hotel—(1) For failing to keep at all times a record showing, in the case of each assistant, the total hours of work and wages paid under the provisions of the Shops and Offices Act; (2) of working an employee in excess of 10 hours a day and failing Jo bst. Mm orating r a tea for the flamaj

(3) with working three assistants in excess of time, and failing to pay them overtime for such. Tho magistrate remarked that the first charge—failing te keep a book— was the most serious one, and was the source ■of all tho trouble. Defendant would bo fined £2 en this charge, and on tho two others would bo convieted and discharged. CARELESS OFFICE BOY. E. : W. Mills and Co. were charged with—(l) Neglecting to put a stamp on a receipt for £2 1.25. 7d., and (2) neglecting to put a, stamp on a receipt for £3 7s. Id., both of which receipts were sent to tho Makara County Council. Defendant company explained that the mistake had arisen through the office boy, who was handed tho receipts to frank with the franking machine, but forgot to do it. "I quite see that the mistake was merely accidental," said the magistrate, "and I think that the ends of justice will bo met by a nominal fine of one shilling." THE BUt/LDOG. ,A. Anderson and Albert Bradbury made no appearance on charges of being the owners of a bulldog which attacked Sing On Kee. A Sao of £3, with costs amounting to £1 6s. 3d., was imposed in each case. An amount of £1 out of each fine was ordered to be paid to Sing On Kee, the person injured. STATE QF A HORSE, J. Zortea, of Berhampore, was charged with, cruelly ill-treating a horse' on December 24 by working it when it was in an r unfit, state. Defendant pleaded not guilty, and Was represented by Mr. V. B. Willis. Mr. R, M. Watson appeared on behalf of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Donald Harry, Rait, veterinarian, of Palmerston North, stated that ho met Inspector Seed oil the morning of December 24. They were discussing cases. of cruelty wben defendant came along! driving the horse hi question. Mr. Seed called on the driver to stop, which he did, and on examination, the animal was found to have badly strained tendons. Defendant was informed of the i;ature of his act in working a horse in that condition, but made no remarkand drove away. ' ■ . j ' After some further questions of wit- J ness by counsel, the case was adjourned fill Monday. YOUTHFUL THIEF> A youth of 19 years, George Howard. Grey, appeared to answer ti'o charges, ont of stealing 20s. from Horace Lewjn, and ono of stealing 40s, from Henry Lontant. He pleaded guilty and was remanded until February 11 for sentence. - In the meantime he is to bo J kept apart from other prisoners* i ■'. THE SHOPS ACT. J A. Dimdore, who was prosecuted on tho information of the Inspector of Awards, pleaded guilty to failing to' close his shop at the hour required under : tho Act. A fine of £1 was imposed, AFFILIATION CASE, j Tho hearing of the affiliation case, | Emily Grace Hirimcs v. Frederick ] Thomas Bould, was coßiintted before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M. The case was ! then adjourned' after a sitting lasting: practically.,the whole day. Mr. H. .s'.' OlLeary-appeared for the prosecution* and Mr. P. \V. Jackson for tho defence! OTHER CHARGES. Thomas O'Neill was remanded until February 11 on a charge' of breaking and entering the premises of Charles Brown and stealing money, etc., to the value of £20 9s. Peter M'Cabe pleaded not guilty to a; charge of using certain language. Accused asked' for leave to obtain a solicitor and witnesses and upon his agreeing to pay the costs of the three witnesses present ho was permitted to do so. 'Die case will came up for hearing on Monday. For insobriety Edward Henry Wright was fined £2, Christina Lawson 10s., and Esther Collier was ordered io pay 17s. 6d., tho cost of curative treatment. Another first offender was fined 10s. Frederick Sheldrake, who appeared on/remand on a charge of deserting from s.s. Remuera, was sentenced to a fortnight's imprisonment, DANGEROUS PRACTICE. A boy of 15 years appeared in tho Juvenile Court to answer a charge of breaking a bottle on the beach at Lyali Bay. Mr. J. O'Shea.VCity.Solicitor, said that this practice was a very dangerous ono and must be stopped. The boy had placed the bottle on a concrete wall and bad broken it. The broken glass lying on the beach was very dangerous to the large number of bathers m the vicinity. The boy was severely cautioned and discharged. THE CITY BY-LAWS. After a partial hearing, the cases against George Bradley (1) of furiously and negligently riding a motor-bicycle in Lower Cuba Street, (2) of riding a motor-cycle at a greater speed than 'eight miles an hour across the intersection of Lower Ouha and Wakefield Streets, were adjourned to February 13. Mr. J. J. M'Grat-h appeared for defendant, and Mr. J, O'Shea f or the prosecution. In the preliminary evidence it was stated that accused was travelling at a speed of 37 miles an hour, and that he knocked over a* young man and broke his-collar-bone. It is the intention of the Magistrate to view the scene of the occurrence. No appearance Was made by Oswald Graham on a charge of failing* to carry a rear light attached to bis motor-ear after dark. He was fined 10s,, with coste 7s. William Jackson was fined 10s., with costs 75., for using a motor-cycle without a registration number attached. On a charge of riding after dark without a light he was lined £1, with costs 7s, Bartblii Paino, an Italian, anil Alfred Tilbury were each charged with smoking in auction marts. Paino was fined Is., with costs 75., and Tilbury, who failed to appear, was fined os., with cost's. 7s. For leaving a vehicle in a public place without a competent person in charge, Francis Ca-rlyle Keering was fined 10s., with costs 19s. For allowing, horses to wander at Miramar, fines were inflicted as follow: —James Ogden 95., costs 125.; John Telford, Is., with costs £1 135.; H. Walker Is., with costs £1 13s. Harold William Brown was fined Is., with costs 75., for riding a motor-cyclo in Willis Street without a, number.

PETONE POLICE COURT. T

. A' sitting of the Potone Police Court, was held yesterday morning, before Messrs. Coles and Short, J.l'.'s. Frank Wilson, charged with being the owner of a dog that attacked a person in Fitzherbert Street, pleaded not guilty. Defendant was ordered ts pay Court costs (lis.). ' Charged with ridinn a motor-cycle without a light, Charles Peterson was fined 55., with costs (75.).

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19140207.2.110

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1978, 7 February 1914, Page 14

Word count
Tapeke kupu
2,219

LAW REPORTS. Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1978, 7 February 1914, Page 14

LAW REPORTS. Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1978, 7 February 1914, Page 14

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert