MAGISTRATES' COURT.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1487, 21 November 1878, Page 3

MAGISTRATES' COURT.

CHRISTCHURCII. Thursday, Novkmuer 21. [Before (3r. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.] Dbunk and Disorderly. Margaret Duffus was fined ss. Indecent Exposure. William Mason was charged with being drunk and indecently exposing himself in a public place. Francis lahey, a night watchman at the Bank of New Zealand, said about midnight he saw the prisoner at the Bank of JNcw Zealand corner, and a lady and gentleman were passing at the time in tho direction of Hereford street. His attention was drawn to the accused by the state of his dress. He remonstrated with him, when the accused aggravated the offence by worse conduct. The offence was witnessed by another gentleman. Witness then reported the matter to the police, and the accused was subsequently arrested. Constable Kerr said shortly after 12 o'clock he heard a pea whistle in the direction of the Bank of New Zealand, and going there he received some information which caused him to go in the direction of Hereford street and at the corner of Manchester street, he saw the accused. Brought him back to tho Bank corner where he was identified by lahey. Witness then arrested him and took him to the depot. His Worship sentenced him to seven days imprisonment with hard labor. Eoberfc Morrison was then brought up charged with the committal of a similar offence. Mr Neck appeared for tho accused. A very intelligent little girl about nine years of age having been examined by his Worship as to her knowledge of telling a lie, was sworn, and gave evidence as to the nature of prisoner's action, the details being unfit for publication. The offence was committed in tho presence of the witness, her sister four » years of. age, and another child. The witness sent for the brother of one of the children, and subsequently informed his mother. The witness was cross examined very closely,_but adhered to her statement, which remained unshaken. The mother of the last witness said she had seen the accused before. It wis about four o'clock on Thursday last. Her little daughter was away playing in a paddock with her little sister, another child and two or three babies. In consequence of a complaint that her children had made to her, and the brother of one of the girls, the latter went after him and beat him Accused endeavored to beg off, and told the girl's brother that it was not he (accused) that had done it, but the beer. John GHlk, residing off Montreal street South, said he saw the accused in Brown street last Wednesday week. In consequence of some hing ho had heard he watched for the accused, and saw him come out of a house. He then brought him face to face with the children, who identified him, and he (witness) then accused him of improper conduct, and said he would teach him how to speak to little children in the future. After the children had recognised the accused ho (witness) beat him. Detective Benjamin proved arresting the prisoner at Sydenham on the 18th inst. On explaining the nature of the charge, the prisoner said he was as innocent as " the flowers of May." All he had done was to play fully accost the children, and was guiltless of any criminality. Subsequently he was assaulted by a young man, whom he should have surmnonen had he known who ho was. This was the case for the police. Having addressed the Court, Mr Neck called Mr Johnson, bookseller, Colombo street, to testify to the character of tho accused. The witness said he had known the accused for about four years, and that when ho wub sta'ion-master at Sheffield he lived in his house. He was known to be very fond of children, and he had frequently been in the habit of taking his (witnesses) on his knee and fondling them. He had never known anything agdnst hi-* character. Sergeant Wilson being called said he had known the accused for about eight years, when he was barman at the Caledonian Hotel and elsewhere. He did not know anything against him, and he had frequently been of assistance in giving information to the police. His Worship sairl tho ease had been very clearly proved, and it was only owing to the good character given the acrused that he was not sentenced to a lengthy term of imprisonment with hard labor. Twelvo months imprisonment would not have been too much for such an offence, but owing to the testimony that had been given in his behalf the sentence would be one month's imprisonment with hard labor. Assault. Alfred Walker appeared to answer a charge of assaulting bis wife, Eliza Walker, on the 15th of November. Mr Izard apptared for the defendant. Eliza Walker, wife to the defendant, said that on the 10th of the present month she had received no injuries whatever from her husband. Dr Frankish had been attending her for some time, but she did not know who hid S3nt for him. She Baid that on the 9th instant she went on board tho Clematis, barque, bound for Sydney and Hobart Town. She was brought home by her husband returning voluntarily. Her husband struck her with his coat, but not to hurt or injure her. Had not been assaulted any time about that date. Had been confined to her bed lately, but not from that cause. Cross-examined by Mr Izard—Had not laid any information against her husband, neither had she instructed any one else to do so. "Was only present now, through a warrant which had been served on her, and not of her own will. Sergeant Hughes, being sworn, said he went to Mr Walker's house on the 14th instant, and asked to see Mrs Hughes. He was conducted to her bedroom, and he asked Mr Walker to withdraw, as he wished to make a statement to his wife in his (Mr Walker's) absence. Mr Walker refused to withdraw. Witness questioned Mrs Walker, who said she had no complaint to make against her husband and had laid no information against him. Mr Inspector Hickson said it was evident that a mistake had been made in the date in filling up the warrant. The offence for which the information had been laid, had been committed on the 15th of October instead of November, and he would ask the Court to have tho information amended and adjourn the case for future hearing. Tho Court directed that a fresh information should be laid with the date cor reeted, and adjourned tho hearing until a future day.