MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume VII, Issue 779, 19 December 1876, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Tuesday, December 19. [Before G. L, Mellish, Esq, R.M.] Drunkard Disorderly. —S. Saul Brighting, charged with drunkenness, was fined 10s; Michael Ryan, 20s; and Frank Welstead, a very old offender, was sentenced to forty-eight hours’ imprisonment with hard labor.

LYTTELTON. Monday, December 18. (Before W. Donald, Esq, R.M.) Dunkenness. —John Whitmore, arrested by constable Bullen, was fined 10s for this offence.

Drunkenness on the Bailway — Charles Eousley, arrested by constable Bullen, was fined 20s, or in default 96 hours. Larceny.— John Roach, John Byrne, and Thomas Nash, on remand, were charged with this offence. The Sergeant-Major withdrew the charge against Roach. J. D. Penny, an able seaman aboard the Langstone, gave evidence that he went ashore with Nash on Monday evening last. Nash gave him a drink of brandy out of a bottle at the end of the pier. He could not see the battle, as it was dark, but it was about the size and shape of the bottle produced. He did not tell him where he got the bottle. Witness was in the same watch w r ith prisoner, but was not working in the hold. When he drank the brandy Byrne had been in the town two hours, but he had not been. They then went round the town. He returned prisoner the bottle after he had had the drink, and he believe he threw it away. Detective Smith said that since last examined he had found the bottles produced at King’s boarding house. Had compared them with those from the pillaged case, and find the stoppers, &c, are precisely the same. Nash had said he bought two shillings’ worth of brandy at Coles, and took it in to Mr King’s boarding house to drink He had been to all the hotels in town, and found that none of them had brandy for sale in similar cases, except Mr Kiddy, of the Empire Hotel, and he stated he had sold none for three weeks. John Roach, a colored man, seaman aboard the Langatone, said on Monday week after knocking off, he left the vessel in company with prisoner Nash. They went to town; he was with him all the time; they went straight to Mr King’s. Nash was the only one with him. He went into the sitting-room, and Nash asked for a glass, which he got, and poured some brandy out of a flask similar in shape to the one produced. Mr King, Nash, and himself had a drink, and Byrne coming in at the time he had a drink too ; a second bottle was also drunk. During the day prisoners were working aft between decks, amongst some cases of candles, spirits, &c. Witness was working forward that day ; saw no brandy in the forecastle that day. After staying at King’s some time, Nash said there was a light case of brandy aboard the ship, and he expected there would be a row about it. Frederick King said prisoners were in my house about 6 p.m. on Monday—that day week. When I came in I asked if they had come from Christchurch ; they said “No,” they were from the ship, where they had been working. Afterwards, Nash asked me for a tumbler, and offered me a “nip,” which I took. He handed out a parcel, containing the bottles produced; they opened one and had a drink, I went out, and on my return found them all three sitting together drinking, I offered them a plate of soup, and they came in and asked my wife and the washerwoman to have a drink; they refused, but I had another. R ext morning my wife found the bottles produced, and threw them outside. They did not say where they got the brandy from; I knew that they belonged to the Langstone. John Cole, sworn, said—l am proprietor of the Lyttelton Hotel, I never sold brandy in flask to any of the prisoners; but one night I sold one of them two shilling’s worth of brandy in a lemonade bottle. I have had no flasks of the sort produced in my house for the past three weeks. Edgar Wheeler, watchman of the ship, was also examined, but his evidence was of no importance. The Bench said that though he had very little doubt of the guilt of Byrne, he would give him the benefit of the doubt, and dismiss him. As to Nash, the law presumed that when property, known to be stores, was found on an individual, that person was guilty. He was satisfied with the identifi cation of the bottles found with that in the pillaged case aboard. If sailors descended to the level of common thieves, they must expect to be punished severely. He would sentence him to twelve weeks’ imprisonment, with hard labour. The reserved decision against Robert Anderson, for permitting gambling in his licensed house, was given as follows :—The Bench said that they had no doubt that throwing “ Yankee grab” for drinks was gambling. No case of the sort had been brought before him, but he wished to make this statement public. He had referred to the highest authorities, and it was distinctly laid down that all games with dice, and even playing skittles for beer, was gambling. He had had great doubt as to whether he should convict in the present case. If the throwing had been for money he should have had no doubt about the matter, but, as it was a question if more or less should be given for property, he should dismiss the case. At the same time he must warn Mr Anderson that he had been sailing very close to the wind, and should advise him to avoid any such thing in future. He wished distinctly to again impress upon the public that <s Yankee grab,” and in fact all games of dice, were illegal, under the 27th section of tile Public-house Ordinance.