MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1945, 19 May 1880, Page 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Wednesday, May 19. [Before Q. L. Hellish, E*q , R.M., and J. E. Parker, Esq., J.P.] Dbttnk: and Disobdeeiy. —J. *eph Hannan and John Kelly, for this offence, were fined 20s. Steading fbom a Shop. — A little boy aged 12, and his sister aged 15, were charged 1 with stealing confectionery from the shop of i Mr Broadley, the value of 4i. They pleaded “Guilty.” His Worship administered a severe caution to tho accused, pointing out ' that a persistence in the course they had en--1 tered on would, if persisted in, certainly bring them to ruin. They were then discharged. Hobsesteadinq.—Frank Burner, on remand, was brought up charged with stealing a horse, saddle, and bridle, Ac., from James Oordy. Accused pleaded “Not Guilty.” James Cordy, farmer, Hororata—l had a black horse, saddle marked, in my possession on the 29th March. On that day I allowed a person unknown to me to ride the horse. I did not see the horse again until I found it in tho possession of the police. The accused was , unknown to me. I did not sell the horse, or authorise any one else to do so. There was a saddle and bridle on the horse, and a coat strapped to the saddle. The coat, saddle and 7 bridle, and horse, I value at £29 15s. Sigismund Oohen, pawnbroker, Colombo street, Christchurch —I know the accused. He came to my shop about April 3rd. He pawned a coat with me for se. I gave the I coat up to Detective O’Neill. (Coat identified.) James Heed, horse-dealer, Papanui—l know accused. Saw him on Easter Monday. | I bought a horse, saddle, and bridle, from accused for £B. The horse was black, aged ; saddle marked. There was a coat strapped to tho saddle, which I did not buy. The receipt produced is the one he gave me. X handed the horse over to the police. r Detective O’Neill—l arretted the accused on i the 12th instant on a charge of stealing a horse, Ac. Accused denied having had a horse in his possession. Afterwards he said he was sorry for what ha had done, and hoped I would assist him. I found the pawn ticket produced in his possession. I got the coat > from Mr Cohen. This was the cose for the • Crown. The accused was committed for trial at the next sessions of the Supreme Court. Pebjoey.—Henry Davie, on remand, was again brought up. Robert McKnight—l was present in the ’Resident Magistrate’s Court on the 13th of May last; on that occasion X administered the oath to the accused before t he gave evidence in the case Duncan v. Henderson. I heard his evidence as to a receipt (now produced). He swore the receipt was not signed by him. Matthew Henderson—l I am an accountant, having offices in Hereford ' street. I have recently had some transactions with the accused. The writing in tho body of the receipt is in my handwriting. It was written in December. The receipt refers to the purchase by me of six head of cattle from accused. I saw the accused sign the receipt at my residence after it was written ; there , were no others present at the time. The pay- • ment was made up by a dishonored promissory note for £l6, an 1.0.tJ. or receipt for £lO, i and cash £B. I was present at the Resident Magistrate’s Court on May 13th. Accused then swore that tho signature on the receipt was not in his writing. Accused stated in his examination that he had no transaction with me before he saw me in Staple’s shop, which took place some time in February last. Cross examined by Mr Loughman—My first transactions with accused were in September or October last. The promissory note, at one month, was thea made in my favour. The promissory note was returned to accused when the cattle receipt was given. I gave accused £ls cash in consideration of the promissory note. I gave it to him in two sums of £l2 10s and £2 10s. X have no booked account of it. I keep no account of such transactions. I lodged the promissory note with tho Bank of New Zealand for discount. It was not discounted by the Bank or anyone els'i. I then left it with a gentleman named Piper as collateral security. It was not made payable at any Bank, and was not endorsed. After tho promissory note matured and was dishonored accused came to me and asked me for a furl her loan. This was some time about the end of November. I lent him £lO. The security given for this amount and that due on the promissory note was to be a bill of sale over some cattle which accused had purchased from Ford and Newton. He gave me the receipt from Ford and Newton of the payment for the cattle. I agreed to buy the cattle right out. The bill of sale was not completed; it was handed back to Davis together with the dishonored promissory note and 1.0. U. for the £lO when I purchased the cattle right out. I think the £lO was paid in all silver. I am not sure as to the date of its payment. I think it was in November, after the holiday. John Brough Stansell, crier of the Supreme Court, Christchurch, produced declaration of bankruptcy and statement of assets and liabilities filed by Henry Davies. John Scott, clerk to Mr Neck, solicitor I saw accused sign the documents produced by last witness. He swore to the truth of the statements contained in them. I compare the signatures on receipt produced and the other documents, and I believe them all to be written by accused. Wm. A. Neck, solicitor, deposed to have taken the affidavit of the accused as to the correctness of the bankruptcy papers. His Worship here left the Bench. G. L. Hellish —I am Resident Magistrate at Christchurch; I was on the Bench on the 13th, when the case Duncan v. Henderson was heard. I heard and saw an oath administered to accused. X heard his evidence. In reference to the receipt produced, he stated, he did not think he had signed it ; it was not tho way he spelt his name, and subsequently swore positively that he did not sign it. He also stated that he had never had any transaction whatever with Henderson prior to his meeting him in Staple’s shop; that he did not know him by sight even before that, hi* denial of the signature. These statements were material to the issue of the case before the Court. This was the case for the Crown The accused reserved his defence, and ws» committed for trial at the next session of the Supreme Court.