MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1393, 2 August 1878, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. TiiuHauAY, August 1. [Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.] The following evidence in Driscoll and Lemon’s cnse was heard after wo went to press yesterday : Falsk Pbetences.— Susan Martin, wife of (he previous witness, deposed to prisoner Lennon showing her samples of various articles —one French merino at Is a yard, calico at 2id, carpet at 2s, and a very superior lady’s boot very cheap. He finally showed some cloth. Witness corroborated the evidence of her husband as to what had taken place and been said. In cross-ex imination, she said—l am quite sure wo would not have bought the cloth at the price but for the inducement that the suit would be made up for 12s 61. That was not the only inducement. I don’t think that would have been sufficient, but he also promised to cut out the boys’ suits for 3s I can make suits with my machine. I am a very good hand with the machine. He told mo he could let me have a silk dress for 30s, but I had no money for that. Ho said one piece was Irish something. I thought it was good if it was Irish like you. [Laughter ] Ho said the trousers and vest would cost 30s in the shop. He threw those pieces in for the £5 10s. The first piece, ho said, would make a suit of clothes worth £6 10s. Alexander Clarus Lane, ledger keeper at the Colonial Bank, produced Mr Martin’s cheque for £5 10s, It was drawn in favor of “ Mr Drisco,” and dated the 24th July. It was cashed on the 24th, on presentation by accused Driscoll. It has been charged to Mr Martin’s account. To Mr Joynt—l did not know Mr Driscoll before. Detective Benjamin deposed—The pieces of cloth produced I received from James Marlin on the 30th of last month. They are in the same state as they were then. They were measured by Mr Michael Nolan in my presence on the 30!.h. Mr Nolan is a draper at Ballantyne’s. To Mr Joynt—There has been no cutting or clipping—“ cabbage”—from them. Robert Allen, outfitter’s salesman at Strange and Co.’s, deposed—The largo piece of (doth produced contains about three and a half yards, and is double width. Jt is a mixture of very common quality. [The witness here measured the piece, and found it to be a little more than three and a quarter yards.] That quantity of cloth would make a coat and trousers for Mr Martin nothing more. The value —selling price of the cloth I should say was 6s 9d per yard. The next piece is a very common imitation of Irish frieze, and is about 2 yarns, double width. Its selling price is 6s 6d to 6s 9d per yard. It would make a sac coat, but not an overcoat. The next piece, a Saxony tweed, or an imitation Scotch tweed, measures 2\ yards, and is worth 2s 3d a yard. It is a trouser length. The next piece is a union tweed, and contains yards. Union tweed is a mixture of cotton and wool, or jute and wool. The piece would make a pair of trousers, nothing more. Its value is 3s 9d per yard. The next piece contains 2J yards. It is a piece of shoddy, a mixture similar to the others. It would make no more than a pair of trousers. To Mr Joyni—We sell material like some of these, not all. The prices I have given are those at Strange and Co.’s. I am in the habit of selling such goods. We sell it over the counter, but do not make it up on the premises,. If tailors come for it wo sell it to them. I can’t tell you the price tailors would charge for them. As a rule tailors do not make up that class of goods. It is principally purchased for family use, to be made up at home for boys. We sell made up clothes, some of that quality. Such cloth is put info what are commonly called slop goods. A suit from such cloth would cost from £2 10s to £3 10s. The making alone would cost 50s. The coat Mr Martin is wearing is not an overcoat. Wearing it over two coats would not make it an overcoat. An over coat should come at least five or more inches below the ordinary coat. [Mr Joynt proceeded to extract a large amount of technical information from the witness,] It would take four yards to make an overcoat. Such hawkers as the prisoners do not affect the town traders. It might to a small extent. I have no feeling against them. I like to see good returns. A little jealousy might exist. If I were selling the piece I last examined I should not say it was shoddy or West of England cloth, I should call it what it is, a “ union” or Saxony. Neither “shoddy” nor the other terms commend the article, us the quality is so well known. James Richard Triggs, salesman at Edwards, Bennetts and Co., deposed that the first piece, of 3 \ yards, would make a suit for Martin. There might be enough for a waistcoat more. This witness valued the cloths in the same order as the previous one, but gave them different names. His measurement was slightly in excess, hut his valuations were, for the first 6s to 6s 9d, second 6j 9i, third 5s 6d, fourth 3s 6d, and fifth Is lid per yard. Michael Nolan, tailor and cutter at Ballnntyne’s, valued the cloths as follows: —First 7s, second 3s or 4s, third 2s 6d or 2s 9d, fourth 9d or lOd, and the fifth 2s 3d to 2s 6d. His evidence corroborated that of the other experts as to the cost of making up such cloth being much too great for its quality. Detective Walker deposed —I arrested the prisoners on the 29th ult., at the police station, and explained the charge to them. Driscoll said they were travelling for M'Cooey and Co., of Melbourne, and showed me some of the invoices of that firm. Lennon was present and said, “Yes, that is the firm,” or something to that effect. I had been inquiring for them, and they came to the police station to see what I wanted them for. For the defence Mr Joynt called William Cook, of Messrs Heyward and Co.’s, who deposed that that firm had passed some goods for prisoners, but not dutiable goods. They were goods from the north, not from Melbourne. Two or three bales were on the premises now. There had been nine or ten. Mr Joynt at this stage applied for the discharge of prisoner Driscoll His Worship at once discharged the prisoner. Mr Joynt then called Edward Driscoll, traveller, w'ho deposed—l am an importer of goods from Melbourne. The invoices produced are genuine. They arc of goods I have received within the last three or four months. Their value is about £3OOO. I sell them in the name of Driscoll A; Co. To Inspector Hickson—l am a traveller, I cannot (ell you within a few months, for how long, but for about ten years. I was a hawker in Victoria eight or nine years ago. 1 call a hawker a traveller. I have eitme been in Queensland selling goods, not ns n hawker, but wholesale and retail. I have travelled a good deal in this neighborhood. I never had an establishment for cutting out and making clothes. I don’t know the Crown Hotel, I know an hotel kept by a colored man. I have no establishment with a calico sign and black letters, “ Maguire and Co ,” or “O’Dallaghan and Co.” I have never said that I had to any person, or anywhere, not O’Callaghan and Co. or Maguire and Co. Mr Joynt here interposed that the witness was not bound to criminate himself. Inspector Hickson did not wish him to criminate himself. Witness continued —Prisoner is not a partner of mine. Again Mr Joynt interposed, ns the questions could not affect the case. The Bench could not see how they bore upon it. Mr Joynt addressed the Court to the effect that no offence had been proved, laying great stress upon the fact that the inducements which had been proved were nothing more than a promise. His Worship remarked that sight should not bo lost of the false statement as to the tailoring establishment. Mr Joynt argued that that statement was only accessory to the promise, and not a falsehood as to a fact connected with the goods. Hia Worship postponed judgment till Friday (this) morning. On the application of Mr Joynt, the hearing of the other charge was adjourned till Thursday next. Accused was admitted to bail. Fkiday, August 2. [Before Q-. L. Mellish, Esq , R M.] Obtaining Money by Falsk Pbetences, —Thomas Lemon appeared on remand. He was addressed by the Bench as follows : —“ I find I must dismiss this case, as no jury would convict on the evidence. At the same time I wish you to understand that you don’t leave this Court with a clear character. V ou made use of falsehoods which, however you may look upon them as trade falsehood*, are deliberate lies. You did so in order to induce the prosecutor to purchase the goods. You knew your statements to be lies. This

does not redound to your credit as a tradesman, and I hope this will make you act for the fuiure a little more honestly in your dealings. You can go.” Larceny of Flowers. —Peter Johnston was charged with stealing some paper flowers, of the value of 14s, the property of William Simmons. William Simmons, tobacconist and bowling saloon keeper, in Gloucester street, deposed to prisoner being on bis premises on Thursday night. In a reading-room on his premises were some paper flowers. Witness missed two of these, and afterwards saw them in prisoner’s hands outside his shop. He told prisoner to take them back. Prisoner refused. Witness then gave him in charge. Mary Belinda Sweeney, waitress at Burmeister’s Oyster Saloon, deposed to seeing prisoner in the saloon with two bunches of paper flowers. He was the worse for drink. Constable Cullen deposed to arresting prisoner with the flower* produced in his possession. Prisoner had been drinking, but was not drunk. In his defence, prisoner said that the witness Sweeney put the flowers into his pocket. Prosecutor s»id ho did not wish to press the charge. The Bench dismissed the accused with a caution, and ordered him to pay 7s. Alleged Highway Robbery with Yiolence. —John Dempsey and William Hart were charged with highway robbery with violence. Mr Thomas appeared for them, and stated that prosecutor had preferred the 1 charge because he had been detected in the act of stealing a tumbler from the Garrick Hotel, of which hotel Dempsey was barman. As the police were unable to proceed with the charge against the prisoners, Mr Thomas asked that the charge of stealing the tumbler should be proceeded with. Whrst the information was being laid the Court went on with the next case. Larceny.— Christine Robson was charged with sealing a ring, valued at 15s, from James Hogwood. Prosecutor, a billiard marker at the Royal George, deposed that he wis at prisoner’s oyster shop, in Gloucester street, early this morning, when she took the ring from his finger. She said it was a nice ring and refused to return it. He did not refuse to let her take it. The Bench at once dismissed the case. Stealing a Tumbler. —The case against Peter Johnston, who was the prosecutor in the case of highway robbery, hut was now charged with stealing a tumbler, was not proceeded with. All the accused wore admitted to bail, and remanded till Monday. LYTTELTON. Friday, August 2, [Before W. Donald, Esq., R.M ] Refusal of Duty —John Murray, a seaman belonging to the barque Yiniex, was charged by the master with this offence, and sentenced to four days’ imprisonment. Desertion. —Alex McLean was charged by Sergeant-Major O’Grady, who arrested prisoner aboard the Wakatipu this morning, with deserting from the ship Otago, now lying at Port Chalmers. Accused admitted the offence, and was remanded till Tuesday next.