MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1250, 21 March 1878, Page 2

MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, Mabch 21. [Before G. L. Hellish, Esq., R.M.] Desebting heb Children.—Ann Lloyd was charged on warrant with deserting her two children on 20th November last. When arrested accused said she was only receiving 4s 6d at the time from the Government; that she was in delicate health, and could not earn sufficient to support them. She had gone away in the .hope of recovering her health, and then getting a situation, which would enable her to support her family. Sergeant Hughes stated that the children had been wait to the Industrial School for a fortnight atter they were deserted. Mr March called, stated that accused was receiving assistance from the Government tor her two youngest children. She never complained of ill -health, or of the assistance received being insufficient. He had not received a very favourable report of her. In reply to the Bench, accused said she had one daughter married, and two others in service. She was willing to contribute all she could towards the support of her two little boys, and would pay 5s per week. His Worship said he did not wish to impose any penalty on the accused. He would allow of the matter standing over lor a week, and in the meantime, the master of the Industrial School could apply for an order. Drunkenness. Minnie Edwards was fined 20s, and a first offender ss. Thomas Watt, who was still suffering from the effects of drink, was remanded to Lyttelton for eight days. 6

Larceny of a Watch.—Charles Smith was charged with stealing a watch from Davis's pawnshop, High street. Mr Izard appeared for the accused. Detective Walker stated that he arrested the accused the previous evening at the police station. Charged him with the above offence. Accused said he bought the watch from a man in a hotel near where the house was burnt down the other day. He said he bought it on Tuesday night, and gave £5 10s for it. No one was present, and he got no receipt for the money. Witness told him the watch was stolen between ten and eleven o'clock on the Tuesday morning, and accused said he did not go out of his house that morning before halt-past one. Witness afterwards went to his house in George street with Mr Selig, Davis's manager. Got the clock produced on the mantelpiece.. Mr Selig identified the clock as one that had been bought at his place on the Tuesday. Witness got the shovel produced at Wilson' new building, Lichfield street, which Mr Selig also identified as having been bought trom him on .Tuesday. Accused gave the name of Charles Smith at the depot, but witness believed his name was Brooks. In cross-examination, witness said accused told him he had bought the watch in the bar of the hotel, but he did not say where he had paid for it. A. A. Selig, called, stated that the watch produced had been left at Davis's shop by Mr Cohen, of Dunedin, on Friday last to be cleaned. Last saw it hanging up at the end of the counter in the shop on Tuesday morning. It was possible for a person standing outside the counter to reach over to the watch. On Tuesday morning accused came in about ten o'clock and purchased the clock and spade produced, and paid for and took them away at the time. Witness had occasion to leave the shop for a little while almost immediately after accused went out, leaving his mother in charge ; and on his return he missed the watch, and gave information to the police. Next saw it on Wednesday night in detective Walker's possession. Valued the watch at £5. Witness had not authorised any one to take the watch, nor had he sold or disposed of it. Witness's mother was in and out of the shop during his absence. In cross-examination witness said he wound up the watch in the shop on Tuesday morning, about nine o'clock. Accused gave witness £2 to pay for the clock and spade. He was about ten "minutes in the shop,, and walked up and down while there. Witness returned to the Bhop a little before eleven o'clock. Was quite certain he sold the watch and spade on Tuesday. In reexamination witness said the counter did not come quite down to the end of the shop, where the watch was hanging. J. J. Donaldson, furniture dealer, Durham street, stated that accused came to his place on Tuesday evening about six o'clock. He bought £3 10s worth of furniture, and paid cash. Accused showed witness a watch at the time and offered it for sale. Witness told him he was not a watch buyer, but would be able to dispose of it for him to advantage. Witness looked at the watch, and saw it was a good one. Afterwards when the goods were being delivered, accused said if he had the money he would buy a bedstead and table. He asked witness if he would buy the watch, and if so he would buy the articles. He then returned to the Bhop, and bought £2 5s worth of goods, and witness gave him £1 15s cash in change. Accused told him he had paid £7 10s for the watch in Dunedin. Next morning witness took it to Nathan's to learn the value of it, and then learnt that Detective Benjamin was looking for a watch of a similar description. Witness then went to accused's place, and found he had removed from where the goods had been delivered the previous night. When he found his house afterwards he told accused the watch had been stolen, and after a long conversation accused gave him £3 10s. Witness gave the watch to Mr Nathin, who accompanied him, and when accused heard it was stolen he went voluntarily to the lock-up with witness. Mr Nathan handed the watch to Detective Walker. In cross-examination, witness said that accused might have said he bought the watch from a man who had come from Dunedin. Accused and his family seemed to have settled down in the house where witness found him. Inspector Hickson told his Worship that Mrs Selig was a very important witness, but was disinclined to attend Court. He would have to apply for a subpoena for the following day, as Mr Izard was desirous of the cage being remanded. Remanded until Fridav.