MAGISTERIAL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2529, 17 May 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. Wednesday, Mat 17. [Before R. Beetham, E«q., R. M.] DEtTKKHKNßaa.—William Warner was fined 10>, or, io default, forty-eight home’ imprisonment with hard labor.

A “ Suspect.”—Edward Longmore, otherwise Adams, Brans, Elms, or KlsdaJe, waff charged with having no lawful visible means of support. Sergeant Mason applied for aremand, to give time for further inquiries to be made about the prisoner. Ur Stringer, who appeared for the defence, objected. The man had been charged without the slightest reason. When arrested he actually had £ls in his pocket. It was incumbent on thopoliee to go on at once and' prove their case if they could. Detective Connor stated that he went to a boarding-house on the night of Monday last, and seeing the prisoner asked him if his name was Longmore, Prisoner said his name was Elms. Witness knew at the time that prisoner had been convicted for stealing a cash-box from Mr Deal’s Bother, fie'd Hotel. He had then called himself Lorgmore. Witness tearched him and made enquiries at the boarding-house. Prisoner bad £ 5 on him and a bunch of gold trinkets. He had also in the hunse four suits of - clothes and a bicycle. He told witness that he had been at work.. Cm making enquiries, witness found that since February last, when prisoner hid been dischargedfram gar.', he had worked a few davs at the Euiapoi Woollen Factory earning £1 6s, and he further had worked (or a person in Christchurch earning 6s. Witness went back on Tuesday to the boarding-house, and found that prisoner had left without saying anything to the keeper of the honse. Witness found that be and a man named Anderson had occupied the same bedroom, and that they had made a practice cf deeping most part of daytim.e and were out at nights. Witness afterwards found and arretted prisoner. Detective Neil stated that he knew tbe prisoner as having served two years in gaol at Wellington for honse* breaking ; he was then named Kledale. Witness had frequently seen him in company with convicted criminals in Cnristohurch, and knew him to be an associate of a notorious criminal from Otago. He nad also formerly been mate with a well known criminal in Sydney named Tilley. Sergeant Mason stated that the man Anderson, mentioned by Detective O’Connor, had been arrested for larceny at tbe Exhibition, and he made his escape from the constable chiefly by the connivance of the prisoner, who managed to put the constable on the wrong scent. It was in. looking after Anderson that attention had been drawn to prisoner. The police had i roeg reason to believe that prisoner had teen concerned in a series of robberies in Ohristohuarch. It was impo: Bible for him to have got the money, <tc., Le hal honestly, end for that reason the remand had been applied for. Mr Stringer still opposed the application. He urged that the specific charge had not been proved against the prisoner, who had plenty of means of support, and no matter what they might think, unless the polios were prepared to prove that those means had been obtained dishonestly, there was not a shadow of a reason for detaining him. It would be a monstrous thing if, because a man had committed a crime and suffered a penalty for it, he were to be detained till the police had worked np a case against him, or till ho had to be discharged for lack of evidence. The prisoner was remanded till May 25!h. Laecehy.—William Anderson, on remand from Tuesday, was charged with having stolen from a stall in th" Exhibition, on May 3rd, a hair brush, valued at ss, the property of J. Clark. Prisoner had been arrested on the spot by constable Robson, bn / had succeeded in making his escape. He was rearrestid by constable Stanley on Tuesday. Sergeant Mason applied for a remand. He taid he did so for me same reasons which he had given in Longmore’s case. They ware associates, tni it was expected evidence against prisoner of a series of offences would b.- found. Prisoner was remanded till Msy 25th.

Nuisance. —J. Drinkwell, of Madras street, grocer, was charged with allowing a nuisance to exist on his premises. It was stat. d by the I epector that since a previous hearing the nuisance had been abated. Defendant was ordered to pay coats, and the case was dismissed.

Oxvrr, Case —Wolfe anil Lewis v Beatty, claim £IOO, for damages said to be sustained by the non completion of a contract, Mr Perceval appeared for plaintiffs, Mr Garrick for defendant. The cise for plaintiff was that defendant had agreed to let to them for four weeks, beginning on April 25th, at a rental of £6O per wet k, the Theatre Boyal, of which he ia the owner. Plaintiffs are thoprincipals of the Mastodon Minstrels, and it was for their performances that the theatre had been engaged. £lO bad been paid by plaintiff's when the bargain was made. There facts were admitted by defendant. Plaintiffs further alleged that on their arrival ia Christchurch they found the theatre in such a condition that it wss impossible to open it on the night contemplated. Certain parts of the stage machinery necessary for working the reentry proper to the performances, and part" of the ordinary appliances of the theatre, were out of place, and in consequence of that the company were unable to appear. The cost of bills, advertising, end the loss cf the night’s receipts was put down at the sum now sued for. Messrs Lewis, Hydes, members of the company, with J. Nelson, carpenter, and H. Hob ason, machinist fur the company, gave evidence on the above points. Defendant stated that when plaintiffs arrived to go on with their enterlainmcnt the theatre had just been vacated by the Williamson's company Ds'endant had given Mr Williamson permission to make certain alterations in the fitting on condition that everyth n< was replaced. Things were not so replaced when the Mastodons arrived, men engaged by Mr Williamson were at work on them. Defendant pleaded that it lay with plaintiffs to prepare the theatre for their own purposes. He did not consider himself bound to have everything ready for them. He further stated that with the sciurry which was ready the performances might have been given. Further evidence was hoerd for the defence, and the caeo finally was adjourned till May 25th, to procure the evidence of Mr Williamson, who is now in the North Island,