MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2445, 6 February 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, February 6. [Before R. Beetham, Esq., 8.M., R. Westenra, and J. E. Parker, Esqrs., J.P.’s.] Drunkenness. —For first offences one man was fined ss, and another, who had been locked up all night, was discharged. Labceny in a Boarding House. Richard Harris was brought up charged with having on the night of February 2nd stolen from D. Buchan the sum of 30s. He pleaded “Guilty.” The police stated that ho had been sleeping in a boarding bouse in tho same room with the prosecutor, whose pockets he emptied during the night. The money was found on him. He was further stated to be a notorious young criminal, having been several times up for various offences. He had been sent to the Industrial School, and had served twelve and three months’ terms in gaol for larceny. He was now sentenced to six months’ imprisonment with hard labour. Breaches of the Licensing Act.— Daniel Franklin, boarding-house keeper, of Manchester street, was charged with having sold beer without having a licence. Mr Joyce appeared for defendant. Constable Fluellen stated that on January 26th, at about 9 30 p.m., he and Constable Hill went in plain clothes to the house kept by defendant. They called for beer, and it was brought to them. They were served three times after suppe'r by a boy. On one of these occasions witness saw the boy draw tho beer they were served with from a barrel. The beer was paid for each time. Constable Hill gave cor-

rohorative evidence. He naw the first beer they had drawn by defendant from a barrel. In cross-examination witness said he pretended to be unwell when they first went into the honse, and they afterwards pretended to play cards. All their movements, however, were made with a view to detect the sale of liquor. They were instructed to do so. Alfred Oox, servant to defendant, stated that all the money ho took in the house he placed in the till. On this occasion his master was out of the house when he served the beer. On hie return he told defendant what ho had done. Defendant refused to take the money, and said witness would have to take the responsibility of the sale. Daniel Franklin, the defendant, tendered evidence on hia own behalf. He stated that he never sold beer. He was absent, and the boy had acted without directions, and against his instructions from tin, and ho had repudiated the sale as far as possible. He kept the beer for the use of his boarders, to wuom he supplied it at dinner, as a part of their meals, a custom which he advertised, and had written on his windows. He certainly was not present as Constable Hill had stated. Constable Hill recalled, reaffirmed that statement, Simeon Stoddart called, deposed that defendant was with him at the Temperance Hotel, Manchester street, on the night in question for about half-an-hour between nine and ten o’clock. After considerable deliberation, theJßench inflicted a fine of £2O, remarking that in their opinion small fines in these cases would bo of no avail. Defendant said he had a large family, and could not possibly pay the fine. The Bench said they would allow him a month to pay it in.—Jas. Fredk. Le Sueur appeared to answer a similar charge. Mr Btringer|appeared for the defendant. Constable Hill deposed that he and Constable Fluellen, in plain clothes, went into the oyster saloon at 11,15 on the night of January 27th last. They had oysters each, and he paid for them. He asked a woman who served them for a bottle of stout. She said “in a moment, sir.” Defendant then came in and offered, if they would give him the money, to fetch the stout. Witness gave him five shillings. Defendant then went into a back room, and brought out a bottle of stout which he opened, and for which he retained 2s 6i. The porter was served at 11.28 p.m. Cross-examined— Witness believed there was a back way from the oyster saloon to the right-of-way near the Commercial Hotel. Constable Fluellen gave similar evidence. He did not think defendant had time to go to the Commercial Hotel and back in the interval which took place between the order and the supply. Mr McKendricb, licensee of the Commercial Hotel, deposed that the retail price of stout was Is 6i per bottle. He often sold stout to defendant —that was before shutting up time. This was all the evidence. Mr Stringer addressed the Bench. His Worship said they would hold that defendant might have brought the beer from a licensed house. Mr Stringer then went on to argue that defendant was justified in charging 2s 6d for a bottle of stout for which he had only paid Is 6d, the excess being an honorarium for the services—just the same as he (Mr Stringer) had a perfect right to procure a bottle of stout for any person, and to charge 6j 8d for his service. The evidence disclosed no offence at all, and he asked for a dismissal of the case. The . Bench repeated their inability to say that the beer had been kept for sale on the premises, and as to the excess, they saw no reason why it should not be charged if people were foolish enough to pay it or similar impositions.—A case said by the police to be exactly similar to the above was withdrawn.— A case against Jane Winter for selling a bottle of stout in a brothel was also abandoned, two sailors who were wanted as witnesses having gone away to sea,—William or Richard White was charged with selling stout on two occasions house in Manchester street on the night of February Ist and morning of February 2nd. Mr Stringer appeared for defendant. Martin Costello deposed that defendant kept some women in his house, which is a fruit shop. A woman took him in there, and he “ shouted” two bottles of stout that night. He slept there, and when he got up in the morning bad another bottle, and later on he had yet another. They were served by defendant and his servant girl, and were produced almost instantly they were asked for. The nearest hotel was the Queen's, at a distance of a few chains. Witness thought the bottles came from upstairs. He paid 2s for each battle. He was a little " boozy," not drunk. Annie Wharton, called by the prosecution, deposed that she went with the previous witness to defendant’s for lodgings. While there the beer on that occasion had been procured from the “ Queen’s.” Constable O’Connor deposed that he was in White’s shop on February 2nd, mid-day. Costello came in with a woman. There were also present two other women, named Harris and Brogden. Costello gave Brogden money. She went upstairs, and returned almost immediately with a bottle of stout. Ho was sure she did not leave the house. Bebecca Harris deposed to seeing Brogden going to the Queen’s and get the stout. Sophia Brogden swore that she had brought the beer from the Queen’s. She did go upstairs as stated by Constable O’Connor, but it was simply to put on a clean apron. She brought the beer from the Queen’s. This was all the evidence. The Magistrate* said the evidence disclosed a blackguardly state of things, but it was impossible to convict on it. The case was dismissed. Burnham School Children. —Antonio Juris, a defaulter in respect of his two children at Burnham, pleaded poverty, and the police bearing out hia statement, the case was adjourned till March 6tb. Oases against Henry Lewis and Thomas Oolemau were also adjourned. Assaults. —Alex. Glasgow was charged with assaulting P. Thomson—a trivial case. Defendant fined Is and costs. —A case of disagreement between women, Kale Gregg and Mary MoPhee, was settled by each being ordered to pay 4s fid, half the costs of the case. —Mary Kemp, for assaulting E. J. Ma-tin, was ordered to pay the costs in the case, 7s. Wiva Desertion. —Jessie Pollock was granted an order protecting her earnings from her husband, Andrew Pollock, who had deserted her and not contributed to her support during the last seven years. Miscellaneous. Matthew Livingstone was fined 10s for furious driving.—A. Hoboth, for driving over a railway crossing whilst a train was approaching, was fined 40j, —Charles O’Malley, on four informations, for leaving materials used for constructing the tramway in High street without proper lights at nights, was fined 5s for each offence, £1 in all.—George Barret, for careless driving, by which he ran over with the mail cart and seriously injured a woman in High street, was fined 10s, and ordered to pay the expenses of two witnesses who had attended twice. —George Frame, for leaving hia vehicle unattended, was fined ss.—The following persons were fined for allowing horses and cattle to wander:—George Osborn, 5s ; A. S. Bull, 5s ; J, Sutton, 5s ; Thomas Jones, 6s ; J. O. Oorr, ss; and James Marsh, 5s. —In the adjourned cases of James Martin and T. H. Green, brought by the Inspector of Nuisances, the Inspector informed the Bench that the alterations recommended by him had been made, and the informations were dismissed, LYTTELTON. Monday, February 6. [Before John Ollivier, Esq., R.M.] Deserting thbib Ship.— Thomas Crank and William Burn, two seaman belonging to the barque Sydenham, pleaded “ Guilty ” to a charge of deserting from the vessel on Saturday night. They were captured on the Bridle path by Constable Allen. As the master, Captain Miller, expressed his willingness to take the men back, they were ordered on board after being duly cautioned. Smuggling.— Andrew Oosmitz was charged with a breach of the Customs regulations by unlawfully unshipping certain goods upon which no duty had been paid, to wit, a fancy desk and a fancy workbox. Evidently the articles were of Indian manufacture. The defendant pleaded guilty, and at the instance of Mr Alexander Rose, the Collector of Customs, he was fined treble the value of the goods, namely, £6. Absent ihom the Jasper. —Two men who had shipped by the barquentine Jasper, which sailed on Sunday for Capetown, were charged with being absent without leave. They bad been given in charge on Saturday morning by the master of the vessel, and Sergeant Morioa now stated that the representative of the owner of the Jasper had promised to be present to prosecute, but had neglected to do so. He complained of the apparent unconcern of the gentlemen in question, as it placed the police in a false position. After the Bench had adjourned the hearing of the charge* until the other business was disposed of, and still finding the prosecutor was not present* the men were set at liberty.