RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3627, 7 October 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Wednesday, October 7. (Before T. A. Mansford, Esq., R.M.)

Drunkenness. —William Muir for this offence was fined ss, with the customary alternative ; Mary Wilson, 10s, or 24 hours’ imprisonment; Mary Leary snd Henry Pearson each 20s or 48 hours, the former being also sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment for habitual drunkenness; and William Lloyd, an old offender, 40s or seven days. Neglected Child.— A child named Kobt. R. floss, whose age was set down by the police as being “ about one year,” was brought into Court in the custody of a female, Prom the statements of Sergeant Bevan and Siib-luspector Mallard it appeared that the mother of the child, an abandoned character who has already two children in the Industrial School, had been turned out of the house she was living in, and was taken yesterday to the Hospital, but the authorities of the institution refused to receive the child ; hence the application of the police that the child should be treated as a neglected one.—His Worship said he was satisfied on the latter point, and inquired if there was a father.—(Laughter.) —Mr Mallard ; Oh yes, there is a father, but I am in doubt for the moment whether or not the full amount has been paid. I rather think LSO has been paid, and, if so, tlie father is exempted from any further contribution.— Iu answer to further questions by the Bench, the Sub-Inspector said if the child were committed, would be taken to ascertain whether the father was able to contribute to its .-upport, His Worship decided to commit the child to the Industrial School for one year. alleged Perjury. —John Wilkes, alias “ Brummy” was charged with having committed perjury in tho Kesident Magistrate’s Court ou the 22ud ult Air E. Cook, defended. It will be remembered that on that diy one Isabella Lyle was charged with being the occupier of a disorderly house, on September 15, and Wilkes, who was one of the witnesses examined (he being the owner of the house iu question), swore that the house was occupied by one M'Leod, to whom he had let it at a weekly rental of L 3 |

M'Leod and Lyle, at present undergoing sentences in the Gaol, were now both ex* atnined. The tirsCmentioned said she never rented the house from Wilkes. Lyle was the occupier. On the 16th ult. Wilkes came to her at the house, and said he understood the hcase was hers, remarking, “ I thought you were mistress of this house.” She replied in the negative : that it was Lyle who occupied it. Wilkes further said that he would n >t have Lyle in the house, and told her (M‘Leod) to take 'possession. In crossexamination witne-s said she had taken the house from Mrs Sutton, with whom Wilkes cohabited.—Lyle swore that she was occupier of the bouse in question on Sept mber 15. She ceased to occupy it on the Friday before M’Leod was arrested. Mrs Wilkts rented the house to her. On the 18th WLkea told her if he had known she had been in the house so long as she had he would have turned her out long before, and ordered her out. She owed rent; in fact she never paid any.—Mr Bathgate produced his notes of the evidence given before Lyle by Wilkes en September 22, when the latter swore that Lyle was not the occupier of the house : that heneverletit to her. Sergt. Andersonalaogave testimony as to what evidence Wilkes gave on September 22.—Constable Hartnett deposed that when he served Wilkes with a subpoena on September 18, the latter said he would have Lyle as a tenant no longer.—The Sub-Inspector pressed that he should be allowed to question Mr Bathgate as to the materiality of Wilkes’s evidence to the case heard ou September 22 j but his Worship decided that the qu ati,.n was inadmissible. —Mr C ok submitted that the charge ought to be dismissed on the grounds of want of precision in the charge; that there was no evidence of the materia ity of Wilkes’s evidence on September 22and that the principal evidence on which the prosecution now relied was not only conflicting but of a character which it was improbable a jury would convict upon.—His Worship was of opinion that two of the most important ingredients of perjury the materiality of the given, and corrupt intention at the time of giving that evidence—had not been proved. He did net consider the evidence of Wilkes material to the issue that was before the i ourt, because even supposing that it was false Lyle had been convicted upon other evidence. Corrupt intention was not proved. According to the evidence of M ‘Leoa she considered herself the tenant; and on the other hand Lyle gave very doubtful evidence. If the case rested on th.; evidence of those two wit-ne-sed he was perfectly satisfied no jury con'd convict upon it; therefore, if upon that ground alone it was unnecessary to send the case for trial. Prisoner would, therefore, be discharged.

Fighting. —Henry Robinson, a seaman belonging to the ship Christian M'Ausland, was charged with being guilty of conduct calculated to provoke a breach of the peace. Witnesses were called by the accused, and their evidence went to show that the captain struck the first blow. His Worship did not consider the charge proved, and dismissed the cast;. John Duucan, captain of the M'Ausland, was charged with the same offence. Constables Harper, who arrested him aed Robinson, and Gallagher gave evidence.—Mr Cook said the captain was entirely free from blame, and had been cruelly treated. The captain yesterday afternoon went tp an hotel in town to receive a testimonial from some of the passengers, and two of the seamen, who had left the ship without leave, waited till he came out. and then followed him and laid hold of him They were very insolent, and when defendant struggled to get free, they “squared up,” and it was only in self-defence that defendant struck he men. An aggravating fact was that, when not defending himself, the captain was struck by one of the men, named M‘warty. Defendant was a gentleman occuping a responsible position, and had been subjected to great indignity by being m irched to the police station without the police inquiring who he was or whether he Was the tigress.-r. The p dice had acted with haste and without discretion.- His Worship said that th§ police had done that which was perfectly right anu. what they were fully justified in doing.- Sub-lnsp. Mallard: I would add that if it had been the Governor of New Zealand himself I would not have hesitated—(Laughter.) —Evidence was then given for the defence, after which his Worship said that he must dismiss the case, which should have been brought under the 29 th section of the Town and Country Police Ordinance. The Sub-Inspector explained that it had been ruled in that Court that although the pplice had power t° apprehend under that particular clause, a magistrate had no power to fine : that was the reason it had not been brought under the clause in question.—Mr JS, B. Cargill, as representing the agents of the vessel, remarked that the police might have acted with a little more discretion in laying the informations; the captain and sailors having been placed on a parallel The captain had been most unwarrantably assaulted by the sailors. He asked that Captain Duncan be exonerated from all blame, and discharged without a slur on his character, as it was necessary owing to the position he occupied.—His Worship: I don’t wish to make any observations. f-Hip Desertion.— Henry Robinson and John M‘Carthy..“ shilling-a month-men” on board the Christian M’Auslaud, were charged by Captain Duncan, with desertion from the, tp. They said they were entitled to leave the ship on arrival; however, at the request of the mate they remained to unbend the Bails, and yesterday, with the leave of the mate, they went ashore.—Captain Duncau (for whom Mr E. Cook, instructed by Messrs Smith and Anderson, appeared) put in the Jog-book, jn which appeared an entry by himself, the first and second officers, to the effect that the men were absent withoqt leave. In answer to McCarthy, his Worship said he considered by the articles the mea were entitled to their discharges when the ship came alongside the pier at Port Chalmers.—The men were ordered to go on board the ship, which they agreed to do.