MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2384, 23 November 1881, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

OHBISTOHUBOH. Wednesday, Novembeb 23. [Beforo G. L. Mellish, Esq., B.M.] Dbunkbnness.—For a first offence a man was fined ss, and orderel to pay Is cabhire.

Pkttv Labobny.—John Juris and William Juris, two neglected-looking little boys about thirteen and eleven years of age, who have frequently before been brought up on similar charges, were charged with stealing six tickets, value 6.i, from the Theatre Boyal. The police asked for and obtained a remand until tho following day, as other thefts of the same kind were under investigation.

Abusive Language.—Elizabeth Budman was brought up on warrant charged with having used abusive and threatening language towards Margaret Cross on November 16th. Mr Joyce appeared for the plaintiff. The offence was proved and accused was fined 10s and costs.

KAIAPOI.

Monday, Novbmbbb 20. [Before O. Whitefoord, Esq., 8.M., and G. H. Block well, Esq.. Mayor, j Obhobne Language.—L. Whitehead, a youth, was charged with utsing obscene language. Accused admitted the offence, and was fined 40s and costs, or in default ninetysix hours' imprisonment. In the next case of the kind the Bench said .that the fine would be £5, with the option of a fortnight's imprisonment. Public House Acts.—Patrick Kearney, W. Burnip, and A. Piper, were each charged with breaches of these Acts, but as a material witness (named Gillies was absent, the cases were adjourned for a fortnight. Illegally Dbiving Houses.—Mark, a Maori, was charged by James Edwards with this offence. Accused, it appeared, had, at the request of other Natives, who considered they had an interest in the land leased by oomplainant, driven the horses away. The Bench pointed out that a claim ought to have boen made for rent before other steps were taken, and in this instance it was shown that complainant was prepared to pay tho rent to the trustees of the Maori from whom the land was leased. Accused was fined ss. Making a False Dkclabation.—Fred. Edward James Hunter was oharged with making a false declaration by which he obtained a marriage certificate. Mr Holmes appeared for acoueed. S. Johnston, registrar of marriages, produced tho " Gazette" notice ef his appointment, and said accused came on sth inst. to the post office with a person named Vogel. Accused said he wished to bo married, and that he had resided in Euiapoi some time. Witness filled up the form. Accused said he was to be married to Mary Ellen Hewson, and stated hor age to be twenty-one years. He said fce did not know tho month, but thought it was July last, and appealed to Vogel, who agreed with him that it was July last. Witness filled into the register the particulars as given by accused, then read them to him, and handed him the book, requesting him to read it through, and sign hia nomo at the bottom of tho declaration which is contained at the foot of eaoh entry in the book. Accused road it to himself, said it was correct, and signed it F. E. J. Hunter. Witness then gave accused the necessary forms, addressed to the Bev. J. H. Sintmonds, Wesley an ministor, Kaiapoi. On the 14th, in reply to witness, accused said tho declaration was false, and had been brought about through unpleasantness at home. Ho then said he believed his wife's ago woe nineteen. Vogol was present on this occasion also. By Mr Holmes —At tho Becond interview he did not soy that tho girl had bean beaten at home, but that there was unpleasantness. He said he had been urged by the girl in order that she mi"ht get away from home, H, Vogel gave corroborative evidence. Walter Howsen said accused had boarded at his house three or four months. Ho had married witness' daughter. She was nineteen years of age asj shown by the vaccination certificate. (Mr Holmes submitted this was no evidence.) Witness then explained that she was born in 1861, Mr Holmes pointed out that this made the ago only seventeen, and the evidence wob unreliable. Ho did not know if hio daughter was likely to be an heiress. Witness was not a man of proporty. Ho would have consented if he had been asked. Ho had einoo given his consent. Sergeant Gilbert said when arrested accused said he knew sho wus not twenty-ono, but her parents did not behave well to her. "She was not eorved like one of tho family, so I marriad her." This having closed tho case, Mr Holmes had hoped the Bench would have been ablo to have dealt with this ca3e of insane amores —tho insanity of love —in a summary way. Tho Resident Magistrate did not aee any other course allowed by tho law but to send the caeo for trial. If on looking into it he could do so ho would, and adjourned it for a fortnight, accused being released on his own bail of £25. Embezzlement. Alexander McMillan, saddler, out of bueinees, was oharged with embezzling £l3 10a aud othor moneys received on account of his master, Hugh Mcliachlan. Mr Naldcr prosecuted, Mr Holmes defended. Sergeant Gilbert stated that he arrested accused on the ll'.h by virtue of a warrant. He said, " I never was a servant of McLaohlan'e, no moro than I am of yours. Tho business was mine, and McLachlan was responsible to the merchants for me. I never received a shilling of wages , from McLaohlan before tho Monday I left, , when ho gave my wife £4." Next day he said in witness' ofiloe, " There was no money of McLachlan's put into the business for over i four months after I started. At the time I i started I got £ls from a friend and £2 10s

[for a saddle that I hud and sold, £2 for a pig and 25s for an orange gash that I had cot sold. I put all that money in the Srtisinesp, and the goods were obtained from Mason, Struthers and Co. and Butler Bros., and McLaohlan was responsible to them." By Mr Holmes—He did not Bay ho had reoeived £3O from one Brandt. Hugh McLaohlan, farmer, deposed—About the Bth April he started a saddlery business is Kaiapoi, and took accused to manage it far him. Accused was omployed at weekly wages of £3 per week to look after the men, keep accounts, pay all wages, and hand witness the balance of earnings. Accused signed the agreement to that effeot (now produced), of which he kept a copy. Witness purohased all the atook in his own name. This arrangement continued irom April 6th to October 17th, when witness got dissatisfied with the money not coming in as he expectod. He took Mr Champion in and demanded the books, which accused refused to giro up at fi.'Bt, but afterwards Mr Oharapion got them. Witnees then found that he had not received the £l2 lO.i and other sums in question, and applied to accused for it. He also met hima week after in Ohriatchurch, when accused asked for his wages. Witness askod him what ho had done with £69 out of the business whioh had not been accounted for. Ho said he had not taken a shilling. He said if ho could get up to tho books he could explain how it had gone. Witness gave him a pound to pay his faro and expenses to Kaiapoi to explain the books, but he could not. Had not received the amount of the present charge. By Mr Holmes —The books were here. Saw the acoused in March. He was insolvent then. He asked .me for a loan of money. Witness gave him £3. He had not then opened a shop in the old Press offieo. Acoused had been working for Mr B. Moore, and said he wanted to start business himself. He started for witness on the 6th. Ho rented tho shop in his own name. Witness was not awaro accused put any stook into tho shop. Knew Senior. Senior went in to work as a weekly man. Never know that MoMillan bought stock in Senior's name. Knew nothing of the invoice produced, or saddlery business. Had been informed that Mr J. Kerr had supplied leather. It was not part of tho agreement to provide stock out of £3 per week. Witness had provided all the stock. Did not say the agreement was made on April 6th. The agreement put in was not made on April 6-h, as dated, but two months before he put accused out, viz , in August. They dated the agreement baok because the arrangement was the same as when it was made. Remember accused receiving an amount from Kinley. His trustee in bankruptcy seized the money, and it was on that day the agreement was drawn up. Did not ask to go into partnership with McMillan in April. Never offered accused £3ooif he would teach witness the business. It was not understood that McMillan being insolvent witness would back him. Witness did not back the bills. Accused bought the goods on his account. Witness went to Mason, Struthers and Co. and told them he would be responsible for what was bought. He signed a paper be coming liable for anything aocused might want for the saddlery business. This was before he started. Witness did not sign an acceptance till a month after. The first earnings was paid him in July of £26 out of the business; not to meet a bill, as accused knew nothing about it. The payment to witness of' £2l in August 2nd did not include the £l2 10s said to hav-o been embezzled. The £l2 10i was croditcd to W. Keith's account in the daybook and ledger. Witness kept a bank account, but not in connection with the business. McMillan paid £4 10s in once. There was a bill coming due ; it was paid in to meet it. Witness had given aeeused the money Jo pay in. The accounts were rendered in name of " A. McMillan, agent." Witness did not think, although he owned the business, it was necessary to use his own name. He thought it would bring a better custom in McMillan's name. [Laughter.] There was no blind. Accused was supposed to charge himself with £3 per week wages. Witness did not know whether he had done it or not. Witness did not understand books. Accused boarded the men; he had not charged for them. He had to pay 83 a week for one and 15s for another. Acoused took tho latter from Mr Wilson, secretary to the building society. Wilson insisted on the rent being paid in advance. Mr Holmes Did you expect accused to be a manager, a saddler, keep the workmen, and pay rent, all for £3 per week, according to agreement. Witness—l had nothing to do with what he did—that was onr agreement. Never had any difficulty in gotting at the books till the last, as accused was too candid to make witness suspicious. Never told Lancaster he never had any interest in the business from the first. Witness one day asked the price of some tacks in the shop. It was cut of mere curiosity. Witness never wanted accused to sign a document acknowledging him as his servant. He tendered him a week's wages of £3 in lieu of a week's notice at the last. After the agreement was signed, and witness found accused paying his accounts by oontra accounts witness told him he would not be responsible for the £3 a week. Witness said he would have the agreement canoelled and wind up the business. Accused tore up his oopy of the agreement. Witness oould not give the date —never kept dates, but it was a month before he put acoused out. It was on September 12th that the agreement dated April 6th was made. Accused never assorted he had an interest in the business till he was asked to account for this money. Knew ho was sending out bills in his own name. Witness objected to it, and nover knew but what aocuaed had altered it. The objection was made at tho latter end of the time. He was never authorised to buy only at Mason, Struthers' and Butler Brothors', or buy in his own name. Witness never paid him wages —he took it out of tho business. Accused handed the business over to him and sold it to Halo and Co., but not at a sacrifice. Did not sell saddles invoiced at £4 at £3. Sold the stock for £176 4> lid, discount 15 per cent, allowed. The stook was valued. Witness told accused that all he wanted was his own money back. Never told Lancaster the busineas was M'Millan's. Never told Bountree that the agreement of April 6 th was to prevent Hale as trustee claiming on accused. By Mr Nalder—The workmon were one seventeen and the other eighteen years old, and one Mrs M'Millan's brother. W. Keith, farmer, Kaiapoi Island, gave evidence of paying accused £l2 10s for saddling. By Mr Holmes—Tho credit was entered in a book. lb was paid in July. Accused—His first payments were coming due in August, and he would want the money then. C. J. Champion, accountant, stated he had examined the books on M'Lachlan's account. Ho found £6B lis lOd not accounted for in proper form. Certain sums had probably been received by aocused for goods sold, and other sums-paid for general expenses, whioh were not entered. The total deficit was £95 2s OS, taking the accounts in tho book according to a statoment made, after allowing £B4 for wages and rent, but sundry charges made would reduce the deficiency by the books £65 lis 10d, The £l2 10a in question was not included iu the cash-book. It appeared in tho other books, but the cash was not accounted for. Accused said in hiß office if the books wore gone into properly the £65 would come out. By Mr Holmes—Witness gave a list of monies not accounted for amounting to about £3O. He went into every item with the accused. The receipts from July 29 Lh to August 2nd, inclusive of the £l2 10s would bo £29 16s 63, less charges £2l 9s. On tho latter date there was a receipt given by McLachlan for £21155. There were contra accounts of £3O which witness was instructed to tako as private acoounts. A sum of £3O was entered ae received into tho business from Mr Brandt, and £5 owing by him which had not been taken into account. Witness had drawn up a form of receipt, to bo signed by accused for wages, which he refused to accept. Mr Holmes contonded there was no case; Tho Resident Magistrate said he would hear tho evidence for the defence. 0. Oram stated he let a shop to accused believing he was in business on his own account. J. L. Wilson, seoretary Northern Building Society, stated he subsequently let accused a shop at 15s a week, and required payment a month in advance, because accused had not a discharge from his bankruptcy. Would never have asked for it in advance if McLachlan had guaranteed it. W. Keith gave evidence that McLaohlan told him that accused worked for him, but that accused refused to reoognise him as his master. John Lancaster stated McLaohlan had told him ho was helping accused through friendship, to do him a good turn. James Kerr, fellmonger, stated he sold accused five or six rolls of harness leather, and accusod gave him an order for part payment on McLachlan. Thomas Chilton stated ho was at aocused's houso before he began business again and saw rolls of leather, harness, chains and other things. This wa9 between the t ime of aocused leaving Moore and opening shop in tho old Pbbss office. Mr Holmes applied

agsin for a dismJißal. The Resident Magistrate said that a prima facie case having bson made out, it -jrould be necessary to oommit accused fjr triaJ, bail being taken, aocused in £6® and two sureties of £25 eash.—A. MoMillan was further charged with having on 28th May, as a servant of H. McLaohlan, embezzled £2 14s; on the 6th June, £3' iSi 5 and on 20th August, £4 7s 6d; but on the request of counsel, these charges were not gone into. Civil, Cases.—W. H. Ovenden v J. Urn, £&lls6i, £3 paid; judgment for plaintiff. B. Hornby v Dr. McCarthy, £3 Si j no appearance. W. H. Ovenden v G>. Fearoe, £lO 4j; judgment by consent. W. H. Ovenden v J. Nixon,' £8 18s j. judgment for plaintiff. Eokersley and Macfarlane v G. Wiseman, £22 7s 8d ; judgment by default. J. R'anby v Nathaniel (a Maori), £1 lis ; judgment for plaintiff.