MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1526, 8 January 1879, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Wednesday, January 8. [Before Q-. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.] Drunk and Disorderly. John Jack was fined ss, Charles Evans 20s, and a first offender ss. Stealing Apples,— James Shearer was charged with stealing a quantity of apples, value 2s, the property of Isaac Burt. The prosecutor, a gardener, residing at Bingsland, said the day previous, just before 1 p.m., he saw the prisoner entering his gate, and watched him go up to an apple tree and pluck four apples. Prisoner, when ho saw he was detected, ran away, but the prosecutor caught him before he got out of the garden. The prisoner had nothing to say to the charge when prosecutor collared him. Prosecutor said he had lost altogether about fifty apples, which were worth about ss, besides the damage done by the prisoner in trampling down his peas. The prosecutor said he was obliged to let the prisoner go for the time being, as ho was not strong enough or big enough to detain him, and he subsequently gave information to the police, which led to his apprehension. A girl named Jane Leek deposed that she resided at Mrs Burt’s, and she yesterday saw the prisoner there. She had not given any permission to the prisoner to pick any apples, and she had hold no conversation with him. She saw the prisoner taking some apples off a tree in Mr Burt’s garden. Sergeant Wilson deposed to the arrest of the prisoner early the same morning in a brothel on the north-east belt, and charged him with stealing apples. The prisoner said at the time that the apples had been given to him by the last witness whom ho had employed to do some washing for him. The prisoner denied the charge of stealing, and said the apples had been given to him by the witness, Jane Leek, whom he had employed to wash some plothes for him, and she had taken them [to Burt's house for that purpose. The charge was a trumped-up one, ans he (prisoner) had no occasion to steal any, as he had plenty of money in his pocket to purchase fruit if he required. The Benoh said the prisoner certainly had some business at the house, and possibly did not think he was doing any great harm in taking the fruit; still he was proved to have taken them. He would bo fined 20s, and pay the cost of the fruit. Neglecting a Wife. Charles William Tompkins again appeared on the charge of neglecting to provide his wife and child with proper means of support. The case which had been twice adjourned for tho purpose of the complainant and defendant coming to some arrangement, has’ been already fully reported. As on the previous occasion, the complainant was represented by Mr R. D. Thomas, and the defendant by Mr O’Neill. On behalf of the defendant, Mr O’Neill offered to contribute £1 a week towards his wife’s support, but Mr Thomas objected to this, and the defendant was''put in the witness box, and cTUvainod on‘bath as to his circumstances. Defendant, being i sworn, said he received, about £3O a year as rent from the Albion Hotel. He got £2 10s a week for the rent of bis shop iu street, and 3,0 s a week for a, ?AtiagU, Oi which he was the owm H e P a J ra to a and taxe? tp the amount of £9 10a per annum, and £l6 l?s fid ground rent. This left his income £lB7 a year clear, Ho was not at present in qrspluymmit, but if he could get a situation lip would bo willing to give his wife 30s a week. H is right in the property, consisting of tho ahop and cottage, was about to be disputed by his brother. Tho defendant was cross-examined at some length as to his means and the value of his property, but adhered to his statement. His Worship said it was evident from the statement of tho defendant that hia property was of greater valpp fhap ho had represented it, and that he was able to contribute more than a £1 a week. He would be ordered to pay 2os a week, and, at tho request of the defendant, tho payments to be made monthly and in advance. Horse Stealing. William Mclntosh, Frederick Palmer, and Henry Shepherd were charged with stealing a horse of the value of £ls, tho property of Charles Euckne 1 .!. The prisoners were defended by Mr a.nomas. tho witnesses were ordered t W art. Th " prosecutor. D-ucknoll, Baldho was a raiding at Yaldhurst. Lfo retired to, bed at 9 o’clock on the Otli inst., leaving a grey mare in a paddock adjoining the house. The gate was closed. At about half-past 11 o’clock he was awoke by his wife. He got up and went out into the road, but could not see tho mare. After going about half a-milc along the road ho saw the three prisoners riding his mare. Ho collared tl e mare, and asked them what they were do ng with other people’s horses. Two of the min jumped down and ran away, aud

M'latosh paid, “ It’s no nee you’re running away now; it’s too late.” The mare was a light hack, and worth £ls. The prosecutor had never given permission to the prisoners to take tire animal awav. The following morning the other two prisoners came to his house, and asked the prosecutor to forgive them for taking his mare away. He refused, and said “It was not the first or second time, and some lime perhaps they might take her away altogether, and he would put a stop to it.” He subsequently laid an information against the prisoners for horse stealing, Mr R, I). Thomas cross-examined the prosecutor with a view of showing that the animal had been taken for a lark, and that the prisoners had played similar tricks before, but without any felonious intentions. Martha Buckwell was next called, but before being examined, Mr Thomas stated that the whole affair was a stupid lark. The prisoners, on the night in question, had found the prosecutor’s mare on the road, where it was frequently in the habit of straying, and for a spree they got on her back and rode her half a mile down the road, when they were overtaken. Two jumped down and ran off, and the third at once restored the mare. The Bench coincided with the view taken by Mr Thomas, and said there was no evidence of a felonious intention on the part of the prisoners, and that the offence resolved into a very foolish lark, for the perpetration of which he hoped the prosecutor would make them pay handsomely by civil process. The case would bo dismissed. Protection Order. —Maria McCallum applied for a protection order against her husband, Duncan McCallum, on the ground of illusago and cruelty. The defendant, who was in a very excited state, addressed the Bench, and stated he had only struck his wife once, and that was under the grossest provocation. His wife had left him and was living an infamous life with other men. Her conduct had been so bad to him and towards her children that he should have boon justified in killing her. The complainant said her husband was continually following her up, and she dreaded Ins violence. All she wanted was protection, as she could earn her own living, and if he would give her a little money she would leave Christchurch altogether. In answer to the Bench, the defendant said ho had a brother in Temuka. His Worship said the domestic relations of the parties were of so wretched a nature that it would bo much better if the defendant left his wife altogether, as the sight of her only served to kindle his anger. The complainant said she had been in the enjoyment of a maintenance order for her children, but she was willing that that should be cancelled, and all she wanted for the future was protection. The defendant agreed to take the advice of the Bench, and join his brother in Temuka, but inquired if the complainant could not bo compelled to restore his watch, which he had for sixteen years, and which she had made away with. Complainant said she had sold the watch through the agency of some man for the purpose of living. She did not know who had the watch at present, but she would endeavor to obtain it. His Worship said defendant would be required to enter into a bond of £2O not to molest his wife for the future, and the order for maintenance would be cancelled.

Transfer. —An application was made by Mr Thomas for the transfer of the Rolleston Hotel, from John Ranger to Charlotte Williams. The application was granted.

LYTTELTON. Wednesday, January 8. [Before H. Allwright, Eeq., J.P.] Ebhxkty. —Henry Quinlan, being found by the police illegally on the promises in a state of intoxication, was fined 10s and costs.