RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3516, 30 May 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Saturday, Mat 30. (Before H. S. Fish, Esq , and J. Black, Esq.. J.P.’s.) Drunkenness.— James Clancy was fined ss, with the option of twenty-fours’ hours imprisonment, _ Uttering a Forged Cheque. —The notorious John Morrison was charged, on remaud, with uttering a forged cheque, of the value .of L 9 ItJs, with intent to defraud Ann Hall of the same.—William Waters said he was barman for George Dodson, of the Provincial Hotel, Port Chalmers. On Saturday, April 25, prisoner was at Mr Dodson’s hotel. He called for drink and paid for it, asking witness to cash him a cheque. Prisoner gave him the cheque produced, for L 5, and witness cashed it —Mr Fish : Is this a fresh charge ?—Sub-Inspector Mallard : It is.— The Clerk to the Court : I read over the remanded charge. There is no fresh offence on the sheet.—The Sub-Inspector : I really understood that the new charge was being heard. There is an information there. The Clerk to the Court: The information ought to be sworn to.—The Sub-Inspector • Mr R A. Lawson promised to he here at half-past ten. He has a subpoena. The Clerk to the Court ; The information is signed. - The Sub-Inspector : Then Mr Lawson has been here. —The Clerk to the Court : I don t say that.—Mr Fish : It is a moat unusual thing for a prosecutor not to be in Court to swear to an information. Every information should be sworn to before coming into Court.—The Sub-Inspector: It is no fault of mine. I will hand in this memo., written by me on May 23, and sent to the office of this Court, requesting an information to be draws out.—Mr Fish ; We will suspend proceedings till some one be sent for

Mr Lawson. If he is not in his office the prisoner must be remanded.—The Court then adjourned for tea minutes. On resuming, the Sub-Inspector intimated that the course he proposed pursuing was to ask that the prisoner might be committed on the charge on which he was before the Cjurt on Saturday last ; as also upon the om which was being heard to-day. The reason was that several of the witnesses in the other casts lived in the country, and he asked for the committal in order that the other cases might be heard in the Gaol, in order to save expense.—Mr Fish ; Will you be able to conelude the second case without the evidence of Mr Lawson?—The Sub-Inspector; Certainly not. He would go on with the case, aud if that gentleman was not there when wanted; he would need to ask for a remand. —The prisoner was then charged with having, on the 24th April, forged a check or order for the payment of L 5, and feloniously uttered the same with the intent to defraud one R. A. Lawson of the same. Waters’s evidence was repeated after which he added : When the cheque was handed to him witness said, “ The cheque is signed H. A. Lawson,” prisonee replying “Yes, the architect.” ihe cheque is on the Union Bank of Australia, and purports to be signed by R. A. Lawson. He gave prisoner L 5 in notes and the balance either in silver or gold. Had not seen the prisoner since.-John Coolaghan, proprietor of the Junction Hotel, said prisoner' called at his hotel on the 25th April, asking for some blank cheques. Witness gave him two. The cheque previously referred to and the subject of this charge was one of those he gave prisoner.—George Dodson said that the cheque was returned to him after being deposited in the Bank, dishonored.—Evidence was also given by Messrs M‘Donnell and Shury, clerks to the National and Union Banks. The former said he forwarded the cheque to the Union Bank, and it was returned dishonored; the latter that it was marked “no account,” Mr Lawson having no account in their bank. He had an account with them some years ago, and witness knew his signature. That attached to the cheque was not his.—Mr Fish : The witness cannot give positive evidence as to Mr Lawson’s signature. He can only say it is unlike Mr Lawson’s writing. Seeing Mr Lawson has not an account iu the Union Bank just now, witness is unable to say that that is not his signature. That does not alter the necessity of Mr Lawson giving evidence.—The SubInspector pointed out that he only asked the question as Mr’ Lawsou was absent. Mr Fish then animadverted very strongly on The way in which the time of the Court was wasted. He said that it was very annoying to see the time of the police officers and the officers of the Court wasted by a person not answering to his subpoena. The only right way to. serve such persons was’ to issue a summons against them for contempt of Court,—lhe Sub-Inspector replied that he had done everything he could. A subpoena bad been duly served on Mr Lawson ; in fact, everything possible was done. He had sent a constable three times to Mr Lawson’s office, but he was told that he had not come to town. He therefore concluded Mr Lawson wds unwelL He asked for a remand for a week on both charges —Mr Fish : There is very serious annoyance in the stoppage «f public business by the absence of this witness. If he does not appear when the case is again called on. or if the case has to be remanded for a similar thing, 1 shall certainly issue a warrant for his apprehension for contempt of Court,—Both c<tses were re* manded till Saturday next.