MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXI, Issue 1794, 20 November 1879, Page 2

MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

OSEISIOHUEOH. Thubsday, Notbmbbb 20. [Bufore G. L. Mellish, Esq., 8.M.1 Detjnk and DiboedebliT.—A first offender was fined 5 s. Illeqaly on Pbeitises. —Joseph Gale was charged with being illegally on the premises of T. J. Moling, in Manchester strcot. The arresting constable found him lying in a straw shed inside the yard. As he was unable to give any satisfactory account of himself he was taken into custody. As there waß no evidence of any felonious intent the accused was cautioned and discharged. False Fbbtekces. —Charles Steinmetz was charged with obtaining £7 from John Steimmetz, by means of a valueless cheque. Mr Neck appeared for the accu?ed. Mr Inspector Hickson asked that the sum might be reduced to £3 10s. By the advice of Mr Nock, the accused pleaded guilty, and asked that the Bench would deal leniently with the case. Iu conjunction with Charles Coombs, he was charged with stealing sundry articles, valued at £3, from the dwelling of George Wilson. The case against Coombeß was withdrawn, and he left the Court without any stain upon his character. Steinmetz pleaded guilty to this charge also. He was sentenced to one month's imprisonment on the first charge, and to six months on the second, each with hard labor. Indecent Exposttbe.—Samuel Rowe was charged with indecantly exposing his person in a public placp. The case was heard with closed doors. After hearing evidence which left no doubt on the mind of tho Bench as to the guilt of the accused, and as he had been previously convicted of exposing indecent pictures in a public place, his Worship, after severely reprimanding the accused, sentenced him to twelve months' imprieonment with hard labor, the prisoner strongly asseverating his innocence. Embezzlement. —Francis Hopkins Valpy was charged with embezzling £5 16s, the property of the Christchurch section of the Railway Employes' Benefit Society. Thomas Brown Bain, sworn, said—l was a member of the Christchurch branch of the Bailway Employes' Benefit Society from July, 1878, to March 9th of the present year. I was assisting the accused as assistant secretary, he being the secretary. A meeting was held on the 7th June, 1878. I was at that meeting. The prisoner was also there, and the minutes are in his handwriting. I cannot of my own knowledge say whether tho prisoner was a member of the society. Mr Eliis was the treasurer. Tho prisoner was appointed secrotary and Mr Ellis treasurer at the meeting of June 7th. Tho roll of the society ciists now, but did not then. At that meeting the Otago rules were considered, and adopted with alterations. The alterations are iu tho handwriting of the prisoner. The letter produced, addressed to the prisoner, io iu my handwriting. Tho prisoner's rep!y is endorsed thereon. I was at that time acting in the capacity of secretary pro tern. The witness identified several letters which pafise-1 between himself and prisoner, the dates r.nd contents not baing spocified. Henry Spencer, foreman of the goods shed, Christchurch, said —I was a member of tho Railway Employees Benefit Society from its starting in June, 1878, uutil March last. I was present at the meeting alluded to by tho last witness, when the rules were adopted. The prisoner was at the meeting when ho was appointed secrotary. I cannot, of my own knowledge, cay whether the prisoner was a member of that society. The receipt for £5 16s produced is in the handwriting iof the prisoner and is a receipt for money I paid to him on behalf of the society. I remember the prisoner interviewing me and Mr Diokenson about the 12th Deoember, 187 S. The object was to arrange with the prisoner about the deficiency in his accounts. Mr Dickenson and I were appointed by the society to see Mr Yalpy and settle the matter

up. Mr Valpy at that time made the proposal containel in the letter produced. We agreed to accept his offer. I next saw the prisoner a day or two after in Mr Di:keneon's office. He did not carry out his proposal. I told Mr Valpy if he did not csme to Mr Dickenson'a office with £SO and a bill on his father for such a date, further proceedings would be taken against him. He said," There is no fear about that; I shall bring the £SO and a bill on my father for £100." I was at Mr Dickenson's office on the date appointed, but the prisoner did not come. I did not see the prisoner again until after ho was arrested. I laid an information against him. Peter Ellis deposed :—I am a draughtsman in the railway department, and was a member of the Bociety referred to by the previous witnesses. I was not at the meeting held on June 7th, but was then appointed treasurer, and acted in that capacity within a month afterwards. The prisoner acted as secretary. It was the duty of the prisoner by rule 15 to hand over to me all monies received by him on account of the society, and it was my duty to pay them into the Bank. The prisoner paid me no money after tho 19th September. He did not pay me tho money (£5 16.) marked on the receipt produced. Mr Dowden succeeded me as treasurer. I did not know whether the prisoner was a benefit member of the society at the time. Edwin Atchley Dowden deposed—l am secretary and treasurer for the ChriEtchureh Branch of tho Railway Employes Benefit Society. I succeeded Mr Ellis in that office. All monies collected on behaiE of tho society are paid to me, and I pay them into the Bank to tho credit of the Bociety. The prisoner has never paid mo £5 16 ■, or any money on behalf of the eociety. Peter Ellis recalled—l received the letters produced from tho prisoner. This was the case for tho prosecution, and the prisoner was committed for trial at the next sessions of the Supreme Court. Mr InBj:e;:tor Hickson said it was not his intention to eo on with the other cases, as a true bill was already found upon them, but he should leave it to the dieo elion of the Crown Prosecutor to proceed or not as lie thought proper. The same bail was allowed. Brba.ch op the Licensing Act;—Mary Bell was charged with selling liquor to a man name! James Whito on October 29th, she having no license. This was a remanded case. The evidence has been taken for the prosecution, and Mr McDonnell, who appeared on behalf of the defendant, now called rebutting evidence. The point turned on the csndition of the witness White on which contradictory ovidonce had been given, the prosecution seeking to establish that he was sober when he obtained the liquor, and the defendant averring that he was intoxicated on this the reliability of his testimony being based. After hearing the additional evidence produced, the Bench considered it was not a case for dismissal, and fined the defendant in tho mitigated penalty of £lO. LYXXELTON. Thursday, November 20. [Before T. H. Potts, Esq, J.P.] Drunk and Disorderly.—L. Johnson, for being drunk and creating a disturbance on Norwich Quay was fined 10s. Obstructing a. Constable. Thomas Hunter was charged with obstructing Constable White while endeavouring ti arrest the above-named offender. He was fined 20s.