MAYOR’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2623, 14 July 1871, Page 2

MAYOR’S COURT.

Tins Day. (Before his Worship the Mayor and the Hon, Dr. Buchanan, J.P.) DRUNKENNESS. Peter M'Evoy was fined 5s and Mary Thomson, an old offender, 40s or 14 days’ hard labor. OBTAINING GOODS UN DDK FAI.SE I’KETENCEP, Thomas Parker, charged with obtaining goods from John Jewitt by means of fake pretences, was remanded to Monday. ALLEGED ARSON. The hearing of the case Regina v. Reichelt was proceeded with. The following evidence was given:— George Davidson, engineer in the employ of Mr Mills, gunsmith, stated that about a month or six weeks before the fire, he was trimming a lucine lamp that he had purchased from Mr Howard, and in doing so he had the lighted wick in his left hand while he poured the oil from a bottle in iiis right hand ; the lighted part of the wick was about six inches distant from the body of the lamp ; while he was pouring the" oil in the lamp the gas from the oil caught fire from the flame, .and the wick and lamp both caught fire. The lucine in the bottle did not catch fire. The lamp bad been burning for some time before, but the body of the lamp was not heated. By Mr Smith ; The lamp had been burning for. about an hour previously. He was quite sure the wick he hold in his hand was at the very least six inches from the lamp he was filling. Having felt the body of the lamp at the time, he was able to say it was then cool. All of a sudden the lamp was on fire; it was sq sud d<-'i} he could not sep how thp igiptinp took place. He could nqt qep the travel from the burping ayiph tp the lamp. The flame did not come up to the mouth of the bottle. Ho kept the oil in a room in which there was no fireplace. The temperature of the room may have been at the time between 50 and 60 deg. ; but that was merely a guess. He held mouth of the bottle whilst pouring in the*oil about two inches from the top of the lamp. Francis Beissel repeated the evidence he gave at the coroner’s inquiry. When be went to the shop on the day of the fire Reichelt was in the act of filling some lamps, but ho could nut remember from what kind of vessel. There were several things o i the tabic at the time. 'I here was a lire in a small grate in the office ; the fire was a moderately good one. Charles Goldammer was subjected to a long cross-ejeammation, without any u ate.

rial alteration being made by hnn in his evidence as already reported. He appeared to be rather cautious as to the answers he gave as to dates, more especially in reference to his bankruptcy. This reticence led to a sharp passage of arms between the learned Mr Barton having objected to the line of examination adopted by Mr Smith as being an unnecessary waste of time, seeing that the date could be fixed by the production of the certificate, . , t .. . Mr Smith complained that no attempt was being made to keep order. If Mr Barton had dared to conduct himself in the Supreme Court as he had been doing, he would have been at once committed. Mr Barton submitted it was monstrous that the case should be dragged on in the manner it was j and his client put to the expen c he was in consequence of the time being frittered away. He was not like his learned friend backed np by three insurance companies, and in the receipt of heavy fees. The case, instead of going on from week to week, would last from month to month if such foolish and absurd questions were allowed to be continued. He asked that there should be a limit to that sort of thing. Mr Smith would not pay the slightest attention to the observations of his learned friend, and asked th. ir Worships to decide whether the question was fair or not. He would point out that great latitude was allowed in cross-examination, especially in case of one who stood in the position of a suspected person. Mr Barton was utterly surprised at Mr Smith daring to say Goldammer was in the position of a suspected person, seeing that he had abandoned a prosecution against him a few moments after it had been comm; need. The Bench thought the question regular, as there object was to test the credibility of of the witness. [Left sitting.]