MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1953, 28 May 1880, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Friday, May 28. [Before G. L. Mollish, Esq-, R.M.I Dbunk and Dsiobdbbly. —Catherine Mo* Donald, for being drunk at Sydenham, was fined 10s.

Selling Fruit on Sunday. —Regina y. H. Marks. His Worship gave judgment herein. He was inclined to think that his decision in a former similar case was not quite correct. He did not go so far as to agree with the whole of Mr Joynt’s contention of yesterday. Ho had no doubt whatever that the statute under which the information was laid is in force in the colony, and up to a certain point met the requirements of the case ; that is, on conviction for an offence of this kind, a money penalty might bo inflicted, and in default of payment distraint might be made : as to what would follow he was not so certain. That, however, was not of immediate consequence. The accused would bo fined ss. Mr Stringer ssid he would consult his client as to an appeal. Assault with Intrnt to Rob. —James Crawford, charged with committing an assault with intent to rob, was, on the application of the police, remanded for one week. Utteeing Valueless Cheque. —William Stanley, alias Charles ''teinmelz, alias Williim Morston, against whom two previous convictions were recorded, was charged with obtaining £4 13’, from Alice Hood by means of a valueless cheque. Accused had run up a billjatjan hotel at Waik iri, and, on 18 h November, 1879, tendered the cheque in payment which was cashed. Prisoner had already served seven months in gaol with hard labour, for offends committed about the same time,and in consideration of this, prisoner received the light sentence of one month’s imprisonment with hard labour.

Laecbny. —Robert Gilkes was brought up for stealing a receipt for £3, the property of Magaret Milner. Mr Joynt appeared for the prosecution ; Mr Neck for the defence. Margaret Milner said she, as agent for her father, collected the rent of a cottage occupied by accused. On the 26ih instant accused called on witness, and saying he wanted to pay his rent, asked for a receipt for £B, which was duly prepared and stamped by witness. Gilkes then snatched up the receipt, scribbled something at the bottom, of it, and saying : “ You have been sharp ; I will bo as sharp as you. I have got the receipt, and I shall not pay you the rent.” He attempted to leave. Witness tried to prevent him, ami in doing so a piece was torn out af the receipt, but the accused finally left with the receipt in his possession, and without paying the money. (Receipt produced and identified.) To Mr Neck—l had previously distrained for the rent. I do not know whether his wife and children were left bare of necessai'ies. Gilkes was not sober at the time he took the receipt. Sergeant Pratt arrested the accused on the 27th on warrant. Accused, when arrested, said he had not stolen the receipt. Mrs Milner had given it to him and then asked for the money. Constable Briggs deposed to finding the receipt produced on the accused when he was brought to the lock-up. Mr Neck, addressing the Bench, said the offence had been committed by accused while in a state of excitement, induced by drink and the trouble he was in at the time. No intrinsic value belonged to the paper he had taken, and the case should break down on that point. At any rate, as no one had suffered by the transaction, he hoped a lenient view would bo taken of it. Mr Jcynt pointed out the fact of the presence of the stamp on the receipt, which in itself made it of intrinsic value. The stamp belonged to Mr Milner, and the accused had simply stolen it. He then quoted authorities to show that the offence, as a whole, constituted larceny. His Worship agreed with Mr Joynt that larceny had been committed, and might have resulted seriously to the accused. Under the ciroum* stances a conviction wonld be recorded, and a sentence inflicted of twenty-four hours’ imprisonment, with bard labor. Civil Case. —Haydon v Smith, claim £2B the value of a horse. Mr Spackman for plaintiff, Mr Stringer for defendant. This case, which turned on whether or not a guarantee had been given, resulted, after the examination of a number of witnesses, in a verdict for plaintiff, with costs £6 2s.

LYTTELTON. Fexday, May 23. [Before Joseph Beawiok, Esq., R.M., J. T. Bouse, and T. H. Potts, Esqs.J LUNACY. —W. T. Roberts, on remand from Christchurch, was discharged, having recovered from lunacy from drink. Obscene Language. —J. Hempstalk, on remand, was fined 40s, or in default a week’s imprisonment, for using obscene language in a public thoroughfare.