RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3433, 21 February 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Saturday, February 21. (Before A. 0. Strode, Esq., R.M.) — John Wilson, for this offence, >vas lija.ed ss, or 24 hours. Theft.—lio\iis Juileh was charged with stealing a coat, of .tW,value ,of L 4 10s, the property of one John Hart.' J&p M'Keay appeared for ac-used, who pleaded hot' guilty —Prosecutor, who is billiard marker afc the Criterion Hotel, masquerade ball »t the Queer's Theatre last night, and that about fo&r this morning he had occasion, in self.-defenpe, tq take off his coat, placing it on a seat near him. On looking for it he found accused with it ou, and the latter said he had brought it with him from London in the May Queen, and refused to give it up. Witnesa therefore gave him charge. —To Mr M‘Keay ; Witness had not been drinking heavily, but had only been enjoying himself through the night. Drank porter, soda water, aud spirituous liquors generally, but kept his head cool, and woke up with a good head, too. Accused did say

something about the coat being bis because 't fitted bo well, and also told witness he had better send for a constable. Constable Duffy stated that prosecutor gave accused into his charge this morning, and on taking him to the station a letter which had been in the coat was found in accused’s trousers pocket. Accus d continually said it was his coat.—Mr M‘Keay said the facts were that a quarrel hod arisen at the ball, and prosecutor and accused both took off their coats iu what prosecutor had called “self-defence ” Accused afterwards picked up the wrong coat and put it on, it happening to fit him closely. When charged with stealing it, however, ho did not behave like a guilty person, but told prosecutor to give him in charge. It was evident that the whole affair was purely a mistake.—His Worship said that in a case of larceny it is necessary to shew a felonious intent. In this case the whole of the evidence proved incontestably that the felonious intent was wanting. The parties were at a ball till morning, had been‘drinking, a row occurred, coats were taken off, and when the quarrel had subsided accused picked up the wrpng coat. It was stated that accused was sober and ought to have known his coat, but he (Mr Strode) could ha.-diy understand a seaman’s being sober under the circumstances—if true he must have been a total abstainer. It was evidently a case of mistaken identity as to the coats, aud accused would be discharged.