MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1981, 11 February 1914, Page 4

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

. THE BETTING CHART. ) TROUBLE WITH A WITNESS, REFUSALS fQ'AMSWEft. Henry Martindale was charged in tlu Magistrate's Court, .yesterday that on oi abatit December 3, 1913, at Wrflingtan, jie published a doemiiMifc whicl contained, a, notification;, on behalf 0i Scott and Martindale, as to bettsir" or horse races to he run at Auckland oiDecember 2G, 1913. Mr. E. W. Burton S.M.* occupied tho boaeh. Chief Deteetivi Broberg prosecuted, ami, Air. M. Mysri appeared for Martimia.le, who pieadei not guilty. Superintendent .Ellison was the firs: witness called for tho prosecution. H< stated that on December 3, H)J.3, he re cc<ived' a letter addressed to the Chic, of Police, 'Wellington. It contained : double chart on the 'Aue-kliind Cup am Railway Handicap, ariid qtioted the o|di on', those; It, was a well-kivowi -method -of '. giving information -oi "doubles.",' The letter also contained i telegram to D. Porter, wliiel contained the .word "hooked." To Mr Myers: Witness knew from gen oral information that Martindale wai "now carrying on business as a- lioak maker. This was common knowledge. Geo. Levy, clerk in the I'ost and Tele graph Department, Wellington, produce! an.'authority giving him permission t< produce three telegrams. Arthur William St. John, clerk; in tlii Union Brink, Wellington, produced i cheque drawn by Scott and Martilidnl for £13 2s. ; Gd., on December 3, Th cheque, which was received from th Bank of New South Wales, was dill; honoured.-. > Francis .-Raymond Pic#, ledgerkeepe .at the Bank of New South Wales, stat ed that this cheque had been receive' from D. E. Porter, Kopiitaroa. A Woman's Effort. Mrs. Porter, said that- on December she visited her husband's residence. While there die received a telegram addressed to her husband. Sh opened it, and on December 2 she dispatched a telegram to Scntt aix Martindale, 'Wellington,- telling them oi no account to send further ccnnnmiiioa tions to her husband's residence but t send them to an address .which she gave She signed the telegram "D. Porter,' and,. .a couple of days later, she re ecived a letter, addressed to *'Mi D. , Porter." This lctte'r contaiuei a'• circular, and she sent the tele gram and circular to Supcrintentleto Ellison, Wellington. She 'had als sent other communications to Su perintendent Ellison. The first lette which she received contained a bet ting circular, betting account, avi' a cheque for £13 3s. Gd., show as credit in tho betting account. Sh gave the cheque, to her husband.' htl sent tho other documents to- Siiperiii tendont Ellison. , Mr. Broberg: You received a tek grant Troiii Wellington, containing th word "booked"?— Witness: Yea. •'Well, hero is a telegram sent th same dav, to Scott and Slartinda-te, sa) iug: "Three Lady Tjomisu to-day," an signed "D. Porter." Is tlmt in you husband's writing?—" Yes," . And you received the telograi "booked" in reply?—"l presume tha it was in reply." ■' Cross-examined by Mr. Myers, wii ness stated that it -was true that- sh iiad signed the 'telegram which she sen to Scott and Mnrtimlale in her bus band's name, and without his authoi ity. Mr. Broberg asked that irlines should be warned before such a quel . tion WR6 nut.

Witness, further cross-examined, Ktutcd that in siting her husband's name she- thought lihe was acting within her right. ]t was true that she had opened the letter containing the cheque without her husband's authority. A Witness Refuses to Answer. David I'.'. Porter was next railed. "Have yon at any time prior to December 1 received betting charts from f?eott and Martindalo?" asked Mr. Broberg. "I decline to answer," replied the witness. Air. JSrobeig: On what grounds? Witness: On the grounds that I might incriminate myself. Mr, Broberg said that ho knew of no section by which witness would incriminate) himself by answering the question. By a great stretch of the law he might bo mado a party to the publication of the card. .The Magistrate took it that there was no intention on the part of tiro police to attempt to proceed against wit»ess. Mr. Broberg replied that tkat was the ease, JWul the Magistrate'tljen rnlod that the question should 1)6 answered. Mr. Myers submitted that Mr. Broberg had no right to say that the note. had. no intention ts pvoseeute, The witness might have beoa advised by • Counsel that be could incriminate himself, and lie should not ba compelled to answer. The Magistrate, however, allowed the question, wbieh was again put to witness. Witness age.tn refused to answer. H« stated that ho had been advised by his solicitor-not to answer such a question . The Magistrate ordered that the question shouil be answered. Ho was quite decided that it would not lay him open to any prosecution. - Still Adamant. Mr. Broberg: Now, Mr. Porter, die you;at any tinio prior to December ] receive a double chart from Scott and ■Martindalii P Witness: Well, I.refuse to answer without consulting my-solicitor. -Mr. Broberg: 1 now aslc your Worship to deal with the witness as-a witness who lias refused to answer 6. question after being sworn. The Magistrate: I am not going te uso the summary power I have in the .matter. I will allow witness to produce ;' his counsel and slww ea.Use why lie should not answer the question. Witness: Who is going to bear the cost if I have to bringcoiniscl here? | Tho Magistrate: It is for yourself te . choose. \oit have to answer the question or show cause why you should not be compelled to give the answer. The case was then adjourned for an hour. , • Order for .Imprisonment Mado. On resuming, Mr. A. Gray, K,C., ap- : pared for Porter, and submitted that if hi.? Worship inferred Train. tho evidence that Martindijle. arid Porter were . concerned in a Letting transactioft, t'heii | Porter would be iitcfinviiiatiitg himself if lie answered tho questi&n. Jt was nc fanciful objection, contended counsel. ; After ait hour's argument, the Magistrate held that there Was no connection between double cards and totalisatot betting, and tho niero fact tliafc a witness received double cards would not expose Mm to prosecution for. totalis*tor betting. Tlio witness Was obliged to answer the question. Mr. Bra-berg (to witness):. Did you, pfwfc to December 1, rectiivq any double charts from Scott aud'MartindaieP Witness; I decline to answer. ' The Magistrate: Then I .must make an order under :thp,.Jui- • tices of the Peace Ant, whi;li' empowers mo to- "inflict imp-risaiiment not: eseced* ,ing seven days <m a witness refusing.to ''answer, .a .gue?ti^|-.wjthoui sbowuifj ■cause for his action.' 1 ' "" *./ | . Mr. Cray.: I ask ,vou to suspend tb.it . .order to'alitor Hie to bring reasons to contest . ? An' order fisr 'three-'days' imprisonmnent, execution to bo suspended for the time being, was made, Mr. Broberg being given leave to call the witness at a later stage. 1 : . Mr. Myers suggested to the Magistrate that it Was a point, for considera- ; tion. (even if ihe answer was in the affirmative) whether it - would help t'lw 'prosecution, . . Mr. Broberg: I would not have stopped at the oils question. Mr. Gray: That is an admission of m.V argument, that Mr. Broberg would at--1 temut to make a eMiin of connections. Alfred P. Dryden, Chief Postmastci ' at Wellington, proved the. transcription 1 of certain telegrams put in by the prosecution. 1 : Dotectivfl'Sergeant M'llveuey saitl 1 that he knew 'Martindalo as a hook--1 maker, and a member of tho firm ol '' Scott and Mjitrindate. i ' He Answers at Last, j At this stag© Mr. (aray, on beliall J of the witness' Porter, said that Porter without wishing to retreat from the ; position which he liad taken up, was L . willing to submit to tho question put tc I him. Important business reasons itiflii- , eiiced liirn in this decision, liis ohjeot t being to avoid delay. . j. Witness again went into the box, ail* l in answer to the question stated ..thai , prior to December 1 lift had Tceeivct double charts, but he could not «av thai the? Were from Scott and Maltindale. j Mr. Broberg: Can yoii say you have . not? , Witness: I don't take any interest n doubles, and don't take any notice ol | double-cAKIe. , Mr. II roller 1?.: Then, Mr. Porter, yet have nothing to fear. , « , Witness admitted having received « j green chart and two white charts., but , lie did'not- know froai who'ln they eame » Mv. Broberg: You don't know where 5 the.v canto from? Witness: 1 know now. Yon know now?—" Only from wl»t 1 have been told sineo I came down," Did tlio defendant tell volt that h( 1 sent veu the chart? —"No." This concluded the examination of tin witness. The Magistrate remarked thai he could not understand wituef! liiir.l given so much The'orilai l for imprisonment would be cancelled. The Defenco. a Mr. Myers, iti opening for the defence, « conteiidfid that the charge laid in the I information had not been proved. It 1 did nut matter wliether His Worship in- * ferred that previetis trartsaetions had > taken pla/e between Scott and Martin- ■ dale and Porter or not. Tliera was no- ' thing to connect' Scott aiid Martiiidalo - with tho double' chart,-nor anything to . suggest that they were willing to enter ! into double betting With the public. - There was no name en tho chart, and t nothing to identify it, 3 .Judgment was reserved, and a. further " information was adjourned si.im die. r " HIS POTATIONS. 4 A seaman from tho Delphic named j Oweii Mnekay denied when charged that k he was drunk and disorderly o r u that vessel on Saturday, and .made several '. allegations against the officers. The ease was heard by Mr. W, R. lliddell, S.M, ' " The Magistrate: Did yqvi have any " drink"? . ' j, Accused: I had two Beers. ' 'l'lie Magistrate: Long ones? ,i Accused: Short ones. '■ ' Tito Magistrate: It ruust have, had some effect on you or the oflieers would not have made tho complaint. ? Accused: You can't please the officers on the ship. Maekay was convicted and fined Kb., in default 43 hours' imprisonment. * THRFT OP BIXOCt'LABS. Tlios. Frodoriek Kverest, a hid of 19, was linmi 205., in default seven days' s imprisonment, on a charge of theft of a pan'of liiufloulnrs at Dimcdin. Accused arrived in tha couitrv in Atwil last, and

for a time served in the Permanent Ar» Ultery. Ho was discharged brcavsc it was thought lie would not make an efficient soldier. Ho joined the Kaiapoi, and sailed in that vessel to DiuKtiin t where lie was' discharged, Some time afterwards the biiKicuiftrs were missed, and the. theft was traced to accused. THE BOY'S LAPSE. Before llr. E. XV. Burton, a lad of 18 years, named Goo. Gray, pleaded guilty to the theft of two sums «f money, 20a. and 405., and a gekl watch. Chicf-Detectivo ISl'oberir said tlio hoy's father had eoiiao down from iMask-j'toii and refunded ihe money, and the Watch had heeu recovered. If tlve boy -was jjiven a elianes- the father would ftrrango for him to go to Work on & farm, away lronj all temptation. Tho Magistrate ordered the? hoy t<s come tip for sentence when called upon. MISCELLANEOUS. Harry John Joseph with two previous convictions, was lined 4.05., in default seven days' imprisonment, for drunkenness. Eugene iMahoney, on remand, was fined 205., in default four days, imprison ment, .and ordered to make good ' the damage, on a thai-go of damaiiiia Hi, slasher, the property of, Henry i,ivises'. ■ ' Kvdyu. V-'ne Kit son was further re* manded on a charge of falsft presences, and n first offender was convicted and discharged for drunkenness. CIVIL BUSINESS. JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT. : Judgment went for plaintiff, by default, in the following ca&es:—'l/ttgaM Stewart v. T. Twist and E. H. Meyer, : £19 IBs. Bd., costs £l los. Gd.; James A. Doherty v, If. J. It.'Hifckey, 65., costs ss. ; Australasian Institute of Marine Engineers v, J. Naylor, £2) costs 10s. j Edmjind Percy ..Bunny v. Frederick Charles Hani!, £20 gs,'2d,, . «osts £2 145.; C. E. lloulstoil y. James M'Oarth.y, £l, costs' 145.;. Edward .J. Ellis y. William Dolden, £4 19s!, costs 55.; ,E. Norton and Company v. Nor* nim Campbell, £G, costs £l' 17s. fid. ; Harriett Ellen limes v. Donald M'Leaii, j«n., £8, costs £1 3s. €d. j it. Price and Co., Ltd., v. 1. M. Kerr, £10 Iss. } costs £1. Kis, fid.; same v. A. J. Peterson, £14 Bs. fid., costs £1 10s. Gd. j J. J. Ef.son and Sans v. John Lewis. £32 08. Cd., costs £3 Is.; same v, i\. F, ; Joh.ps, £14 13s. 7<!., costs £1 10s. 'Gd.; Wellington District Hotel' Oluh and Restaurant Workers' Industrial Union of Workers v. San Fleetwood, £1 iGs,, costs. ss. j 'same v. Walter 'Austin, £1 155., costs 65.; satno v. "Arthur Schulte, £1 165., costs os.; sanm v. Charles Baldwin, £1 IBs., costs 35.: Simc-ster Hero soil and Company 'v. James C. M'Kay, £3 25., costs 10s.- : , V> • JUVENII.E COURT; SMALL" BOYS & £M Js'OtE. Two small hoys, 9 arid 10 ■ years of age respectively, appeared ill the Juvenile Court yesterday cha/gcl 'with' the theft of a stvm of money, including a £10 note., at. Island Bay, Evidence was gireft that they tendered fho note to :i grocer,- and obtained oiw shilling's worth «f sweets, giving as aw expkiin- . lion for the large note tlmt their lather wanted the change. They gave a false ,Jiaij!& and address at f-lio .time, but subsequently.it was discovered that tii.oy Were spending a lot of money. In« (juirios were then made, and the charge laid. Somo. of the money had boon . (lit covered in a street drain. The pn- : erits of tin l (IcliiMjufrits silted that th'o'y' ' had punished the hoys, sa the Magistrate wariicid awl-diseliargiSd them.'