RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Evening Star, Volume III, Issue 809, 8 December 1865, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT

THIS DAT. (Before the Hon. A. C. Strode, R.M.) CIVIL CASES. 3Tisli and Son v M. Moss.—Claim, for £l3 5s for work done. An item of £l2 10s for repairs was admitted, but the item of 15s for additional work was disputed. A witness was called, who gave it as his opinion that the additional work was only worth 7s 6d. Judgment was given for £l2 17s 6d and costs.

Proprietors. of the Otago Mail v Alexander Begg and others (Committee of Horticultural Society).—Claim for £4 11s 6d for advertising. Judgment was given for the amount claimed and costs.

Judgment by default was given in the case of Rogers v Crossley—claim for £1 10s for clothes. The case of Gregg v O’Grady was dismissed, there being no appearance of either party. The cases of Blacklock v C. G. Ross and Co., and Cowan v Bassett, were adjourned until Monday next. STEA LING. Richard alias William White was charged, on the information of Detective Parrel, with stealing from a dwelling at Picton certain property, valued at £5. The Commissioner of Police asked to have the prisoner remanded for a week to allow of further particulars being received from the authorities at Picton, which was granted. WHOLESALE ROBBERIES. . Jno. Lamer, charged with stealing goods, the property of Messrs Herbert, Haynes, and Co., was committed for trial at the next sittings of the Supreme Court. The same prisoner was also charged with stealing one black lace shawl and other articles, valued at £7O, the property of Messrs Alcorn and Ken. Samuel Westley Alcorn, sworn, stated—l am a partner in the firm of Alcorn and Kerr, drapers, of this city. The prisoner was in our employ from the of March until the 7 th of August last, when he left us, we having no further need of his services. On Monday the 4th inst.> Detective Whale called on me, and from information I received, I accompanied him to the shop of Mr Davis, Pawnbroker, Rattray street, where I was shown the parcel now produced, and marked 438, containing piece gambroom, and piece Tweed, which are similar to goods in our stock ; also the parcel numbered 630, containing one table-cover, one box containing a black lace shawl, two muslin dresses, one piece muslin two printed muslin dresses, and one pair muslin curtains. The dresses I identify as having our private mark ; the remainder as being similar to goods in stock. [There were also shown the parcels and bags numbered 116, 225, 348, 2983, 935, 2925, containing shawls, silks, &c., which had been pawned with Mr Davies, pawnbroker, Princesstreet south. Also parcels numbered 53, 147, 311, 464, 509, 469, containing a variety of drapery, &c., most of which was identified by this witness as having the firm’s private mark.] The prisoner purchased goods on several occasions, of which some stockings, one pair curtains, and one shawl are among the property pledged. Cross-examined by Mr Ho worth—-He could have made cash purchases. It is not customary to keep records of cash transactions. Prisoner left us while stock-taking. A Paisley shawl was the only article missed at that time. "We could not tell if £SOO worth of property were stolen, as there is no means of checking it. Michael levy deposed that the four parcels now produced were pledged with him by the

prisoner during the months of August and Sept, last.

Alexander Davies deposed that the ‘five parcels produced were pledged by the prisoner with him. on various occasions. ,

Mr Howorth submitted that there was no case against the prisoner. , His Worship admitted the case was not a very strong one, but sufficient to send to a Jury. The prisoner reserved his defence, and was committed for trial at the next sessions of the Supreme Court.