RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Grey River Argus, Volume XII, Issue 1107, 14 February 1872, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Tuesday, February 13. (Before W. H. Revell, Esq., R.M.) . LARCENY. ' Hugh Robinson and George Squire were. charged with larceny from a dwelling, the property alleged to have been stolen being a watch belonging to Capt. Allardyce, Harbor Master. ■ - Mr Perkins appeared on behalf of Hugh Robinson. ■ Patrick Jamieson Allardyce: On account of the recent flood, I had to remove to Lee's buildings, Mackay street, bey longing to Mr Johnston, of the Melbourne Hotel. From one of the rooms which I occupied — a sitting-room — I missed a watch belonging to me, which was hanging above the mantel-shelf. I last saw the watch about hahVpast twelve on Sunday, and at half-past two I was told it "was missing. . Shortly afterwards I gavo information to the police. I, afterwards saw the watch, on Monday afternoon, in MrDupre's shop. It was a patent lever silver watch, with gold figures ; the maker' 3 name Andrew Matthews, Peterhead. The watch was in good order,, and did not require a glass. ,' By Mr Perkins: I have known Sergeant Robinson, for some time, and have known him to be respectable and honest. I did not see him in the building, nor did I see Squires; except about the hotel.

There were not many people about the building after mid-day on Sunday. John Smethurst : I had been gardening for Mr Johnston at the Melbourne Hotel, and was about Lee's building on Sunday. I did not see Sergeant Robinson there. I saw the other accused, Squires, cleaning a pair of boots near the staircase. ' He was doing so when Mrs Allardyce stated to me that her watch was missing. , ; ;-r The witness was questioned iby; Mr Perkins as to convictions . against himself for larceny. . FitzC.Dupre, watchmaker and jeweller; , On Monday afternoon the prisoner Robinson called at my shop for a pair of spectacles, and also to get a glass in a watch, which, he said, had been given to him for - j that, purpose by a young 'fellow who was cook in the place in whichhe was stopping. When he gave me the watch, I said it . would be better to leave it for half au J hour or an hour. He said he could not. well leave it. I then said it was a watch ! belonging to Captain Allardyce, and that T would have to keep it, aa Captain Allardyce had spoken to me atymt it. . He re- , plied.that he would require to give it' to the person from whom hip got it, 'but I stated that information hid already been given about the watch. asked that I would not mention his name, and I retained the watch. The value of the watch is about L4 los or L4 lss. ) Constable Keating : Yestej rday afternoon I went to make some inquiries, abovjt Ja j watch which', had been loi.t. I metj3er- ;- geant Robinson and asked: him if he had been to Dupre's withfa watoh. He said he had, and had got it from a colored boy who was at Johnston's. He saj.d the boy had given it to him about one o'clock) 'on ■ Saturday. We went to see the colored boy, tfnd, on calling him. out, he was asked if he had given a watch to Sergeant Robinson. He denied thajt he had done so. He said that he had seen a watch in ■ Lee's building on Saturday], and had seen Sergeant Robinson there, atid that, shortly afterwards, a woman told hiim of a watchbeing missing. Robinson Sidhered to his statement that he had receiived the watch from the boy. ; At Inspector Hickson's ;request, a re-^ mahd was granted for ttie procuring of^ further evidence. The remand was made until Thursday, bail being .'accepted. ; ; "■'■ ■'. ' V ;CIVIL CASES.) ,'';''-■- Crogan v. Fraser. Sanrt> v. Roberta.^His Worship gave judgment in these two cases — a claim for the value of a horse which died when out aa hire. His ' decision was, with regard to Fraser, that he was in no. way implicated in the hire of ' the horse ot responsible for its safety. Crogan's man, who had been sent with tHe three hones which were out together on that occasion, gave Roberts charge of the horses, and then and there received the horse-hire. ■ And although Fraser. did ride the horse beyond the coal-jnine, he Considered that was not sufficient to render him responsible. As to the state* of the horse there was evidence, on the one side that he was sound, and on the other hand that he was lame immediately after, leaving town. But it was also shown that, while seen to be in this condition, the horse| did not receive fair treatment, nor was due care taken of hiny Judgment was.given against' Roberts for Lls, being half the valae of the horse. ■ ' ' r ,