Thursday, June 21,

Kaikoura Star, Volume XIV, Issue 749, 22 June 1894, Page 6

Thursday, June 21,

(Before A. W. Ingles, Esq., and G. E. Parsons, Esq., Justices.) Thomas McNulty was charged with feloniously receiving £1 from Anderson

knowing it to be stolen—Anderson was alleged to have given McNulty £l. The evidence given by Const. Smart, T. Whitty and J. Brown was much the same as that given the previous day in the case against Anderson. McNulty, it transpired, bad, early on Tuesday morning, asked at the Club Hotel that a £1 note be changed for him, but that was njot done. The Bench expressed strong dsapproval at the non tendering of that evidence in the previous case, and impressed upon the witness the duty of assisting the police in such cases.—Witness endeavoured to explain, to the effect that he bad done so ; overlooked the matter of the £, it not being connected with Anderson. The Bench would not, however, take heed of the remarks. Accused made a lame statement, on oath, regarding his possession of the £l.

Const. Smart stated that, on the information of Anderson, since his conviction, a portion of the missing money, some £3, had been recovered, and it would (Anderson agreeing) be handed over to Taylor. Thus £6 of his money was accounted for, and Taylor could account for the balance. The Bench directed alteration of the charge to one of larceny, bolding that accused was equally as guilty as Anderson in robbing Taylor. It was a mean crime to take advantage of a drunken mate, a working man, and accused would be sentenced to 6 mouths’ imprisonment, with bard labour, in Lyttelton goal. The Bench regretted inability to make the penalty heavier. The Court then rote.