MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 429, 28 October 1875, Page 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, October 28. (Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., - R.M.) Drunk and Disorderly. Bbenezer Sinclair, charged with being drunk and resisting Constable Firman, was fined 40s and 6s fid damage and cab-hire ; and Thomas Hicks, for drunkenness, was fined ss. Drunk and Committing a Breach of the Peace. — Robert McKay, charged with being drunk and striking a man at the Theatre in view of Constable Hughes, was fined 20s. Horses and Cattle at Large.— For permitting horses, &c, to wander in the public streets, the following persons were dealt with; Edward Campbell, fined ss; Thomas Wheeler, 5s ; Geo. Beatty, 5s ; Benjamin Bnlmer, 5s ; and Abraham Denton, ss. Absent from Horse and Vehicle.— F >r this offence Thomas Wild, John Maluza, and Sami. Ward were each fined 10s. Tethering Horses For tethering horses in thoroughfares Julia Clark was fined ss, and Thos. Aldridge and James Boot 10s each. Unnecessary Obstruction. —Matthew Little, charged with obstructing the footpath with his horse, was fined 10s, Geo. Merson, a boy, was summoned for wheeling a barrow on the footpath, Whately road. Defendant pleaded ignorance of the law, but it was proved he had repeated the offence when told he was doing wrong. Fined 10s. Thomas Milson, summoned for allowing a quantity of bricks to remain on the roadway, Montreal street south, was fined 10s. Driving across Footpath. —William Gittings was charged with driving a horse and dray across a footpath in Hereford street. Defendant said there had been a bridge leading to the right of way, and the City Council had removed it. Inspector Buckley said that the place was newly kerbed and channelled, and the City Council had complained of this practice. Fined 1 Os. James Gilthrow, for a similar offence, was also fined 10s. FURIOUS Driving. —william Edwards, a cabman, was charged with furiously driving in High street on the 16th October. J. Oathcart Wason gave evidence of crossing that street towards Strange’s buildings, opposite High street, on the 16th, with another gentleman, and if the latter had not pulled him back by the coat, he would certainly have been run over by defendant, as the wheel of the cab only grazed him, going at the time at a rate of sixteen to twenty miles an hour. Defendant called a witness who stated that he (defendant) had only picked up a passenger before reaching Strange’s, and could not have been driving furiously. Had Mr Wason been pulled back, he would have been pulled under the cab. His Worship said that cabmen seemed to think that it was the duty of foot-passengers to keep out of their way. Defendant would be fined 10s, Absent from Cab —Harry Jordan was charged with this offence, and also with carrying no lights on his cab after dark. Fined 10s on each charge. Thomas Wheeler, summoned for being absent from his cab, was fined 10s. Obstructing the Footpath. James Scroggins, was charged with obstructing the footpath, with others, on the Whateley road, opposite Bligh’s boarding-house. Inspector Buckley said that the summonses had not been served on the other men. Sergeant Gatward deposed to a crowd of young men who were constantly in the habit of blocking up the footpath, to the annoyance of females who could not pass them. He had asked the defendant to move on, but he would not, Fined 10s. Samuel Fitzpatrick was charged with a similar offence, also on the Whately road. Mr Slater appeared for the defendant. Sergeant Gatward gave similar evidence to that in the last case. He had requested him not to continue to obstruct the thoroughfare, but he would not remove. Mr Slater called a witness named Charles Foster, who stated that he saw defendant come out of the boarding house 'hat evening, and immediately afterwards the sergeant came up to him, and, without asking him to leave the footpath, he asked him for and took down his name. His Worship said that as defendant gave his name when asked he would dismiss the case. Dogs in Park. Thomas Searell was summoned for allowing two dogs to wander in the domain, and was fined £l. Riding on Footpath. — J. H. Lunn and Edmund Aymes, charged with riding on the footpath of the Riccarton road, were each fined 10s. Breach of Licensing Act.— Joel Reed, of Springston, was summoned for selling four quarts of beer on the 16th of October, in contravention of the Licensing Act, 1873. Mr Thomas appeared for the defence. Constable Powell stated that on that day he and another constable went to defendant’s place dressed in plain clothes and h d four quarts of beer (three supplied by defendant’s son and one by himself), for which they paid 4s. In cross-examination the witness said that he and the other constable went to defendant’s place after five o’clock. They went as swaggers, and had some bacon and eggs. He (witness) then spoke about the tea being very thin, and wanted something short. After asking further they had four quarts of beer. He had to use some soft talking to get the beer. A second charge of selling a quart of beer on the following morning to Constable Jenney was also preferred against the defendant. Witness, with Constable Powell, had slept there that night, and next morning, after breakfast, defendant’s wife had supplied them a quart of beer, for which one shilling was paid. In cross-examination the witness said that defendant told them be thought “ they were two of the right sort.” Mr Thomas, addressing the Bench, said there was no publichouse near defendant’s place. He kept an accommodation house for the convenience of travellers. He was informed that the defendant, though having a wholesale license, only kept beer for his own use. The constables went as poor swaggers. Drink was not offered them, and after tea, in response to their solicitations, they were given the beer. The offence was in his opinion not a very aggravated one. and he would ask his Worship to deal as leniently with his client as he could. His Worship said that defendant had applied and been refused a license, and publicans who paid heavily for their licenses, and were constantly under the surveillance ot the nolice must be protected. As this was defendant’s first offence, a light penalty would he inflicted, but the offence must not be committed again. Fined £5 in each case. Ed w.Burns, storekeeker in Tancred’s road, was similarly charged. The evidence showed that, on the 17th October, Constables Powell and Jennings went disguised to defendant’s place and had four glasses of beer and one of

whiskey, for which they paid separately Fined £5.

Breach op Railway Byelaws.—Wm. McMillan, summoned for permitting a calf to wander on the railway line near Riccarton, was fined 10s. Refusing to Support his Father William Alfred Cox, a young man, was charged with neglecting to provide for the support of his father who is unable to support himself. William Cox, father of defendant, said that he (witness) was suffering from debility, and could not support himself. His son had been backwards and forwards to his (witness’s) place for about two years, on several occasions. His son would not do anything to contribute towards his (witness’s) support. Mr Callender told his Worship that the defendant wou'd not work. The elder Cox, with his wife and a young child, were receiving Government rations. There had been fever in the family, and he now brought this case before the Court to see how he was to act in the future. His Worship considered that both father and son were afflicted with laziness, and he would advise Mr Callender to alter the distribution of the rations now that there was no sickness in the family. The charge would be dismissed. Assault. —John Thomas was charged with assaulting John Taylor on the 22nd October. A second information of using abusive and threatening language was also preferred against the defendant. Mr Thomas appeared for the complainant. These parties live at Lincoln, and on that date defendant met Taylor on the road and asked him for money which he said he (complainant) owed him. After some words, defendant struck him violently, knocking him down on the road. On the afternoon of the same day defendant came to his house and threatened he would “ knock flounders out of him” on the public road if he did not pay him what he owed him. A witness named Stace deposed to seeing the plaintiff in a reclining position and the defendant standing over him, but he did not see him strike the complainant. In reply to the Bench, defendant said that Taylor owed him £4 8s wages for two years and in the morning he told him if he would take the bill he would pay him. That was why he went to his (defendant’s) house in the evening. As the complainant did not press for a heavy penalty, a fine of 10s in each case, with costs, was inflicted. Disobeying an Order. Archibald Knowles was charged with disobeying an order of the Court for the support of his wife. The complainant did not appear, and the case was dismissed. Larceny. —William Enderson, jockey, on remand from Melbourne, was brought up charged with stealing a watch in the City Hotel, Christchurch, in April last, the property of Wm, Aitken, farmer, at Ashburton. Mr T. S. Dunan, Crown Prosecutor, appeared to prosecute, and Mr George Harper for the defence. The following evidence was taken: —William Aitken called, stated that he was a farmer at Ashburton. On or about the 26th April last, he was in the City Hotel, Christchurch, and slept in the hotel one night in a room in the right hand, where the newspapers were lying. He believed it was the bar parlour. He had a watch and chain when he went into the room. He went in there to sleep. Before lying down he took his watch out, and, after winding it up, he laid it on the table. The waiter brought in blankets, and he took off his coat and boots, and lay down on the sofa. When he went to sleep the watch was on the table. Next morning when he awoke the watch was gone. The watch produced is the one he lost, and the one he left on the table that night. He had not seen the chain or key since. Had not given anyone authority to take the watch. Had never seen the accused before. By Mr Harper—ldentified the watch by the maker’s name and two marks on the case. A Mr Thacker and a gentleman from the Bays came into the room to see him, when he lay down. No one else came in that he was aware of. Charles Foster, detective in the Melbourne force, deposed to meeting the accused in Bourke street weston 9th August. He said, “ Enderson, have you been to New Zealand lately.” He said, “ Yes.” He (witness) said, “ What ship did you come up in,” and accused said “ in the Otago.” Asked him where the gold watch was he fetched up with him. He said he had no gold watch. He (witness) said, “Yes, you had ; it was a small open-faced one.” The accused said the only watch he had was a small silver one, producing the one which he (witness) had in Court. He told accused it was no use denying it, as he had given a gold and a silver watch to the steward on the passage up, and that he had better tell the truth. The accused then said “ I will tell the truth, and if you will come with me I will take you to where they are.” They both then went in a cab to a house off Moray street, at Emerald Hill, and obtained the watch now before the Court, which he handed to witness. When the accused gave it to him he asked him where he got it from, and he said he had won it off a man in an hotel at New Zealand playing hazard. Asked him the man’s name, and he replied that he did not know his name, but he would know the man if he saw him, and that Sam Haynes was present when he won the watch. Asked accused where the chain was, and he said he did not know, as he never had it; that the man he had won the watch from bad taken it off his chain, and laid it as a stake. Conveyed the accused then to the watchhouse. The watch had since then been in his (witness) possession. It was the same watch taken from the accused. The accused knew him (witness), and knew he was a detective officer. Thomas Willis was waiter at the City Hotel in April last, and remembered when Mr Aitken lost his watch. He (Mr Aitken) slept in the front parlour ; next morning he complained of losing his watch. Accused was in the hotel that night, and so far as his (witness’s) memory would serve slept in No 24 room. Did not know whether he was in any other room that night. Next morning early the night porter went round to all the rooms and informed the lodgers of the loss of the watch. Did not know whether accused had been personally informed of its loss. At this stage Mr Harper asked his Worship whether he would deal summarily with the case. Mr Duncan said he would raise no objection to his Worship doing so. His Worship consented, and Mr Harper said he would now advise his client to plead guilty to the charge. As evidence of character, he would call Detective Foster. Detective Foster called, said he had known the accused for the last twelve years, and nine years in the profession. He was a lad who had ridden for thousands of pounds, and had always been well trusted. He was one of the best jockeys in the southern hemisphere, and had only to thank drink for

his present position. The Chief Commissioner of police, and all the principal sporting men of Melbourne, had had the greatest confidence in him ; and were exceedingly surprised when they learnt the charge preferred against accused. The accused was now ruined so far as obtaining employment in his profession in Melbourne was concerned. The witness identified a letter written by Captain Standish, giving the accused an excellent character while in Melbourne. Mr Harper handed in a certificate of character signed by Dr Fitzgerald of Melbourne and a number of other gentlemen. Mr Harper addressed the Bench in extenuation, pleading the prisoner’s previous excellent character, judging by the letters handed in, and also the responsible position in which he had often been placed and not betrayed. Detective Foster observed to the Bench that though the prisoner had denied having the watch in his possession he had not attempted in any way to dispose r>f it. His Worship said that if the prisoner were s 3 nt for trial he believed he would receive a severe sentence. In view of the certificates handed in by Mr Harper he would only inflict a light sentence. Sentenced to three months’ imprisonment with hard labour, ]Left sitting.]