MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1282, 29 April 1878, Page 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, Apkil 29. [Before G. L. Mellisb, Esq., B.M.] Drunkenness. —Mary Brown and Michael Ryan were each fined 40s. A charge against Elizabeth Lynch for being drunk and using obscene language was adjourned until the following day, at the request of Inspector Hickson, as the accused made a very serious charge against the arresting constable, Sergt. Hughes, which it was stated must be looked into.

Unlawfully Setting Fire to Grass. — Alfred Davison, F, Allardyce, A. Sherlow Robinson, J. McLean, W. Rhodes, James Ashworth, James Bryan, Robert Currie, and William Large were charged with setting fire to grass at Cashmere on 19th inst. Sir Cracroft Wilson said that though ho had suffered to the extent of hundreds of pounds loss through the action of larrikins in destroying feed, fences, Ac., still when he saw the ages of the lads when (hey were brought to him by one of his shepherds, ho felt inclined not to press the charge to a serious extent, and to allow their fathers to settle with him for the damage done, and punish them for their conduct. In the present case a large quantity of feed had been consumed, and a forest placed in serious jeopardy, which ho would not have injured for £IOOO. As he found that the lads, if convicted, must be punished very heavily, he would not push the charge, his only desire being to be protected from the doings of these larrikins. His Worship said that for the information of accused, and all who might be within hearing, he would read the clause of the Act, and he would like the reporters to take a note of it, so that boys and others who wei e in the habit of playing with fire, with a desire to see a blaze, should know what the consequences might be to them. The clause of the Act (Malicious injury to Property) was as follows :—“Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously set fire to any crop of hay, grass, corn, grain, or pulse of any cultivated vegetable produce, whether standing or cut down, or to any part of any wood, coppice, or plantation of trees, or to any heath, gorse, furze, or fern whatsoever the same may be growing, shall bo guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the Court, to be kept in penal servitude for any term not exceeding fourteen years and not less than three years, or to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labor, and with or without solitary confinement, and if a male under the age of sixteen years with or without whipping.” On being asked the question by his Worship, all the boys denied having lighted fires, with the exception of a little fellow named William Large, who acknowledged that he had lighted one. His Worship called the mothers of some of the lads who were in Court, and told them that through Sir Cracroft Wilson’s kindness in not pressing the charge he would rot go into the evidence. Had he done so, and it was shown they were guilty, he would have had to send them to the Supreme Court. Addressing the boys, he told them that he hoped they would be soundly whipped at home, and they could go. The little fellow William Large, who had admitted lighting one fire, thanked Sir Cracroft Wilson for his kindness in a very manly manner, and promised never to do such a thing again, A hulking fellow named Ashworth had the coolness to ask for his expenses for loss of time. This individual had been punished a few months ago for gate lifting. Charge of Manslaughter. Sarah Steel was charged with killing her son, W. 11. B. Steel, with a poker, on the 20th inst. The accused was undefended. The witnesses examined were Dr. Frankish, Mrs Elizabeth Sims, Mrs Margaret Baxter, Mrs Sarah Elizabeth Nichole, Mrs,Jane Maria Thomas, and Detective Walker, who gave similar evidence to that reported at the inquest. The accused, when about to cross-examine some of the witnesses, was told by his Worship that as he would have to send the case for trial it would be as well for her to reserve her line of defence. The accused, however, desired to ask Mrs Baxter whether she had ever seen her beat her boy, and was told by the witness that she had seen her beat him fearfully on several occasions. One witness stated that she had heard accused threaten (o knock the boy’s brains out with a poker, but not very lately. There were a number of spots of blood on a poplar leaf, near to where the poker was lying, looking os if they had dripped off the end of the poker. The blood was not smeared as if it had been caused by the poker rolling over the leaf. When picked up, the poker had blood and brains on the blunt end of it. There were no marks on the ground, and it was too hard at that spot for the poker to stick into it. Inspector Hickson called Elizabeth Ann Steel, daughter of the accused, to see if her evidence would bo desired, but his Worship decided not to examine her. After the evidence had been read over, accused, who received the usual caution, reserved her defence, and was committed to take her trial on the charge of manslaughter at the next criminal session of the Supremo Court. On the application of accused’s husband, his Worship said he would admit her to bail in two sureties of £2OO each, her husband in £IOO. [Left sitting.]