MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1905, 2 April 1880, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Fbiday, Apbie 2. [Before Q-. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.j Lunacy. —Alexander Leekie, charged with lunacy through drink, was remanded to Lyttelton for medical treatment. Dbunk and Dibobdbely.—Two first offenders were fined 5s each, one drunkard 10s, and another 40s Labceny. —William Cook was brought up on remand charged with stealing £lO from the person of William Smith. Mr Neck appeared for the accused. Mr Sub-Inspector O’Donnell asked that the charge might be withdrawn, as, from enquiries that had been made, it transpired that the accused was wrongfully in custody. The prosecutor had deposited the notes alleged to have been stolen from him with a barman, and it was only that the money found on the accused corresponded with what the prosecutor had exhibited in the railway train which had led to his arrest. Mr Mellish at once discharged the accused, and, while regretting that he should have been wrongfully arrested, said ho left the Court with his character unblemished. James Jones, a barman, remanded from the Erevious day, was again charged with robbing is employer, William Henry Messenger, of £3 12s. Mr Neck appeared for the accused. W.H. Messenger, the proiccutir, under crossexamination by Mr Neck, supplemented his evidence of the previous day by saying that the accused turned out his pockets when requested to do so, and said if the money he took out was prosecutor’s he could have it, Matthew Henry Oram, sworn—Remembered seeing the accused serving in Mr Messenger’s bar at the races. Had some refreshment with a friend, and paid accused a shilling, which the latter put into his pocket. Witness told Mr Messenger what he had seen. This was the whole of the evidence. For the defence, James Osborne was sworn. Had acted as a barman for Mr Messenger at the races. Gave references before he was engaged, and thought the other barmen were required to do so as well. Would consider the accused very silly if he took any money when Mr Messenger was so close to him and detection was so easy. Mr Neck having addressed the Bench, Mr Mellish said that the additional evidence of Mr Messenger showed that the accused had practically admitted that the money he took out of bis pocket belonged to the prosecutor. There was not a shadow of a doubt in his (Mr Mellish’s) mind that every shilling found on the person of the accused had been pilfered from his employer. As for the 15s accused said he had won in a bet, there was very little doubt that was stolen too. Still, as there might be a faint probability that the 15s did belong to the accused, that sum would be deducted from the £3 12s, and the balance paid over to the prosecutor. The accused would have to undergo one month's imprisonment with hard labor.

Obscene Language. —Mary Ryan was fined 40a for making use of obscene language in the streets. David Todd, charged with drunkenness and making use of obscene language at the Railway Station, was fined 10a for the first and 20a for the second offence. William McDonald was charged with drunkenness, committing a public breach of the peace and resisting Constable Johnson, who arrested him. The fine and costs for the triple offence amounted to 455.