MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1014, 25 September 1877, Page 2

MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Tuesday, September 25. (Before C. Whitefoord, Esq., R.M.) Miscellaneous.—H. Williams, charged with being drunk and disorderly, was in such a pitifully weak state that he was remanded for eight days to receive medical treatment. John Sullivan was fined 10s for drunkenness, and for destroying a pane of glass valued at 255. He was ordered to make good that amount and to pay a fine of ss.

Illegally on Premises. "William Cody was charged with being illegally on the premises of G-eorge Clark, butcher, at Waltham. Detective Walker stated that he had found the accused in the yard, on the premises in question, with his boots off. The owner of the premises deposed to the accused having been on his premises without cause. The accused averred that he had gone there with David Gray for some meat, after he had been ready to go to bed, and hence his boots being off. Detective Walker stated that he had found Cody's boots at the back of Mra Morris's house,where, the woman stated, he had no right to be. At this the accused exclaimed, "God forgive you for telling an untruth." His Worship said he would hear the case against D. Gray, charged with larceny of beef value Is, before. passing sentence on Cody. Detective Walker stated that he had arrested Gray last night for stealing beef out of Mr Clark's shop at Waltham. George Clark, the owner of the beef, said he had found the accused in his shop. The man pleaded to be let off, saying he would give anything witness asked. The back door of the shop was open, although it was after ten o'clock, as it was the custom to keep it open for the purposes of ventilation. G. Clark's brother gave corroborative evidence. The accused said he was going to buy a piece of meat, was drunk and didn't know what he was doing, and if the Court would be easy with him, he would go away shearing. The Court remarked that the accused had been sentenced for larceny at Timaru, and he would be sentenced to three months' imprisonment with hard labor. Wm. Cody was also sentenced to three months' imprisonment with hard labor, the Court remarking that he was an old offender, and that there was little doubt of his having gone on the premises with felonious intent. Disobeying Order of the Court.—C. P. Fox did not appear in answer to a charge of the Court to contribute to the support of his family. His wife stated that at the time of the last order the arrears were over £l3. The Court made an order for the payment of £5 forthwith, and the balance in one month, in default two months' imprisonment. Lunacy. John Bott was brought up charged with lunacy from drink, and was remanded for medical examination.

Assault. —F. Peiper was charged ■with assaulting George Wakefield. The complainant said that the accused had refused to let hirn have breakfast. He had been working for Peiper, and had also kicked him. A witness in the employment of Mr Sheath (Mr Pieper's neighbor), did not know how the row had originated, but he saw the parties scullling, and Peiper had Wakefield down in the yard. The defendant stated that the complainant had been giving "cheek" on being reprimanded for not having the men's breakfast ready. He also threatened to light the defendant, who acknowledged that he had given the young man a slap for his impudence. T. Lewis had been there when Mr Peiper was complaining about Wakefield's not having breakfast ready in time. He heard complainant use abusive language towards defendant. He had also heard a seuilie, and saw com - plainant "shaping up" to defendant. The defendant was fined 10s and costs of Court. Larceny as a Bailee. —Charles James was charged with larceny as a bailee of a saw, the property of John Lusk. Detective Walker had arrested the accused on Sunday morning, when he said, " It's all right; I've released it, I've got in the house." He then showed a saw, which witness told him he could keep. Witness had got a saw at Stewart's pawnshop yesterday morning, which he now produced. John Lusk, carpenter, said that accused came to his father's shop on the 13th instant, and borrowed the saw produced by Detective Walker, promising to return it, but he had not done so. The saw belonged to witness, who had known the accused as a carpenter for the last ten years. S. Stewart, pawnbroker, said that the accused had pawned the saw produced on the 17th instant, saying it was his own. The accused had nothing to say, and hoped the Court would be lenient with hini for the sake of his wife and children. The accused was further charged with larceny as a bailee of a saw belonging to Thomas Russell. Detective Walker produced the saw, and Thomas Russell stated that the accused had borrowed it from hini for ten minutes on the 13th inst. H. A. Davies, pawnbroker, stated that the saw produced had been pledged with him by the accused on the 13th instant.'as being his own property. The Court regretted to see a man like the accused in such a position, whicli was evidently the result of drink. He should be able to make a good living indeed, as there was not in the country a better paying trade than that of a carpenter. He would be sentenced to one month's imprisonmen with hard labor. Theeatexixo to Stah. —Philip Ball complained that Joseph Fitzroy did, on Sunday last, attempt to stab him with a knife. Accused had an execution in witness's house, at Sumner, for rent. While his bailiff was in possession accused came to the premises, intoxicated, used threatening language, and stabbed complainant in the knee while he was endeavouring to put him off. Mr Thomasfor the complainant, and Mr Izard for the accused. In cross-examination, the complainant said there was no mark on his leg—it cut the trowsers, but did not reach the skin. William Wickers gave evidence which supported complainant's case. James Savage, Fitzroy's bailiff, had seen a struggle, Fitzroy on the ground, and had observed Ball take a pocket-knife out of Fitzroy.s hand and shut it. Witness had seen Fitzroy cutting up tobacco with the knife. Joseph Fitzroy stated that he had taken down the bailiff to

Ball's place; Ball called him a rogue, and defendant called him a swindler, as would be shown in Court. Ball began the row, and witness happened to have a knife in his hand, but it was not meant for use as against Ball, who knocked defendant down twice by striking him in the neck with his fist. Defendant had not been intoxicated, and at the time of the souffle he was cutting tobacco with his knife. He had never threatened to give Ball " two inches" of the knife. Mr Izard reviewed the evidence as against his client, and held that it was contradictory and full of discrepancies. In fact it was simply a case of oath against oath, and the probabilities were strongly in favour of his client. Mr Thomas followed on the other side, and argued that the complaint was clearly borne out by the evidence, which showed that Fitzroy was really determined to have a row, and that that the alleged attempt had beyond doubt been made. The Court remarked that there was no doubt the defendant had been to blame in the transaction. He had gone with the bailiff to point out certain property, and it was his duty after putting him in possession to have left the place without seeking any occasion to quarrel with the complainant. His conduct had v been exciting and annoying. Doubtless he had been cutting tobacco with the knife in his hand, but he had acted provokingly, and if his Worship thought that he had taken it out of his pocket with a deliberate intent he would not pass it over lightly, as he looked upon a knife as a very cowardly and un-English means of settling a dispute. He would be lined 40s, and costs of Court. Failing to Support a Child. —Mary McCauly was charged with not appearing to answer a summons of failing to provide reasonable means of support for her child. She expressed willingness to contribute to its support, and said she was going to work in the country. His Worship accordingly allowed the case to stand over for a month in order to give the accused a chance.

LYTTELTON. Tuesday, September 25. (Before W. Donald, Esq., E.M.) Drunkenness. —Five inebriates were accused of drunkenness. Two were fined 20s each } two 10s each, and the other was dismissed with a caution.

Assault. —B. Horn was accused of assaulting John Higgins. Mr H. N. Nalder for defendant. From the evidence it appeared that Higgins was entirely in the wrong, and the Bench dismissed the case after severely reprimanding the complainant.