MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2035, 21 March 1907, Page 1

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

ALLEGED ROBBERY AT TOLAGA. At tlio .Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning, before Mr. Barton, S.M., a woll-dressed young man named Peter Cleary was charged with stealing £4 13s from 11. Parker at the Tolaga Hotel. Henry Parker, contractor, said lie was with accused and some others during the evening of Saturday, 16th. Ho wont to bed before 10 p.m. in a shakedown in tlio passage. Ho had ill his inside vest pocket four £1 notes, and 13s in silver in a trousers pockot. Ho made certain that the money was in his possession bofore retiring. He took off bis coat and laid it alongside; the vest was buttoned up. AA’itness was sober when lio wont to bed. He did not give accused any money for him or authorise him to bo in possession of it. Constable McLeod woke him up during tlio night, and be discovered the fact that bis money had disappeared. James Aloss, a sample packer, stated that he was employed at the Tolaga Hotel as assistant waiter. He wont to bed at a quarter to-11 p.m., leaving his door open. About midnight be saw accused, half dressed, walking up and down the passago, and lator saw him crawling along. He beard a noise in the passage, and gotting out of bed stood by the door and saw accused kneeling beside Parker. Accused put his hand in Parker’s trouser pocket and back to his own ; then he performed the same operation witli the vest pocket, after experiencing some difficulty in undoing the buttons. Witness went into the passage and said to accused, “Are you any friend of that man’s?” Accused did not reply, but' attempted to move away. AVitness tried to detain him, but he slipped out of his grasp and ran down the passage. AVitness called out to others sleeping in the passage to observe where lie wont, but accused returned and again eluded witness and ran downstairs. Witness then called Air. Sinclair, the licensee, and a few minutes later saw accused come up the other staircase and stare at witness, who said, “It’s no use, you’re caught.” Accused ran towards the fire escape, with witness in hot pursuit, blit upon seeing some ladies,and being only partly dressed, witness returned and went half-way down the staircase and oallod for Mr. Sinclair, wlio went outside and came back with accused. AA’itness then went to bed.

AV. F. Sinclair, licensee of the Tolaga Bay Hotel, deposed that be met accused near the fire escape; lie came to him with a pound note in his hand, saying lie got it from Parker, v’ho asked him to look after it. AA'itness took charge of it for safekeeping, and recommended accused to go to his own room. AA’itness was not satisfied with tlio look of things, and informed the police, who were in the hotel.

Constable AlcLeod. of Tolaga Bay, deposed that he went to room No. 19 at 1.30 a.m. on Sunday. Three persons wore in the room; two of them were awake, but accused was apparently asleep. AA’ith assistance witness pulled accused out of bed, and after a time be opened his eyes and witness charged him with stealing money from Parker. He made no reply, and witness arrested him. On tlio way to the police station ncjeused stated that he only took £1 for safekeeping at Parker’s request. Only 3d was found in accused’s pocket, and n bookmaker’s card. He saw accused at 9.30 p.m. on Saturday, sober, and at 10.30 p.m. he saw him near the Town Hall, when witness advised accused to go to bed, Accused was committed for trial at the next sittings of the Supreme Court to bo held at Gisborno. Bail was allowed in one surety of £IOO. AN ARBITRATION CASE.

Judgment was given by Mr Barton, S.M., on Tuesday morning, in the case of E. L. Maude v. J. A. Harding, claim for £5?9 17s 2d, being the balance due for work done and services rendered and for moneys paid for the defendant. His Worship stated: In respect to the first part of the claim (for work done by defendant for the plaintiff from the date September Ist, 1900, to August Jlst. 1905). Plaintiff says that he worked for defendant as a clerk on an overage of three hours a niglit for between four and five months during tlie years named, and also on an average of one Sunday a month during the same period. Plaintiff’s evidence is corroborated to a considerable extent by other clerks who were in defendant’s employ during part of tlie time plaintiff was working for defendant. In respect to tlie second item, plaintiff’s evidence is that lie worked continuously for defendant for five weeks, and no agreement was entered into as to the remuneration bo was to receive, but I am of opinion from the evidence that tlie amount claimed is reasonable. Defendant in his evidence admits that the plaintiff did some clerical work for-liim, but lie considers the time claimed for was excessive, but was unable to say definitely how long plaintiff did actually work for him. Plaintiff’s evidence is positive tiiat lie worked for defendant during tlie time claimed for, and as defendant lias failed to show the contrary, the plaintiff, is in my opinion entitled to succeed for the amount of his claim. I do therefore award that the said defendant do pay to the said plaintiff the sum of £29 17s 2d, being the amount claimed by plaintiff.