Police Intelligence.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Volume I, Issue 3, 9 May 1863, Page 5

Police Intelligence.

POLICE COURT, QUEENSTOWN. (Before J. Nugent Wood, Esq.) Thursday, May 7,1863. Horse Stealing.—Jas. Chas.Robson, brought up on this charge, was on the request of detective Rowley, remanded for seven days. Drunk.—Jesee Buckland was charged by detective Rowley with this offence. Prisoner was prosecutor in a case of stealing from the person, and had accompanied the man accused, and the officer to the camp, when it became evident to the latter that he was utterly unable to take care of himself; and he took him into custody rather for his own protection than aay thing else. Fined 10s or 24 hours imprisonment.

Obtaining Money under False Pretences. —Charles Cullinan was charged by detective Rowley with having obtained money from Henry Redford under pretence of selling him a share in a claim between Maori Point and Butcher's Point, Shotover, at the same time possessing no such share. He was arrested by the officer on board a steamer just starting from Queenstown. Remanded for seven days, his Worship offering to accept bail—himself in LIOO, and two sureties of LSO each.

Stealing from the Person.—John Marshall was charged by Jesse Buckland with having stolen a pocket book containing one LlO note, a bill of exchange for L2O, and other papers, on the 4th inst., at the Digger's Rest Hotel. The prosecutor, being sworn, deposed that he was a miner, working on Skipper's Gully. He came into town a day or two ago, and met prisoner, whom he had known for the last few

weeks as working in a claim near his owu ou Skipper's. He was stopping at the Digger's Rest Hotel in Queenstown. They were all drinking there between 11 and 12 o'clock on the 4th inst., when prosecutor discovered that his pocket book had been taken away. It was in an inside waistcoat pocket, which was partly unbuttoned at the time. He immediately called out that he had been robbed, when a man informed him prisoner had got it. There were about a dozen men in the room. Prosecutor was very drunk, and knew nothing more about it. Did not give him the book. Identified the pocket book and bill of exchange as his property. The note had not been found. Prisoner—When I and my mate met you at the Digger's Rest Hotel, did you not tell me you had lost a LlO note. Prosecutor—Yes, but I had two : there was one still left in my possession, and some single notes. I did overhaul my book at the bar, but you did not take it then. I thought when I heard you had it that you were taking care of it for mc, but you denied having it when I asked you. John Stevenson said lie was a miner working at Maori Point. On Monday the 4th inst., about midnight, he was walking down Beach-st, when he saw* a crowd of men scuffling in the street. He went to see what was the matter, and heard the prosecutor accuse prisomrof having stolen his pocket book, and immediately afterwards heard some"one call out " There it is," pointing to the book, which prisoner was holding up in his hand. The book (produced) he believed to be the one in question. Took it out of prisoner's hand, and was going up to the camp with it, when he heard a man say that detective Rowley was coming. He then handed it to him. Some other policemen were there, but witness could not recognise them. Rowley then took prisoner into custody; he was drunk, so was the prosecutor. By detective Rowley—The prisoner held it in his hand above his head, as if he were about to throw it away. There were two or throe men struggling at the time. Michael Geary, private watchman, said that on the evening in question, prisoner came and told him that he had been robbed of L7O at Fred. S ui:h's (the Digger's Rest Hotel.( He sent his mate for the detective, and witness went with the prisoner towards the hotel, when he met a crowd of men coming, one of whom saiJk prisoner had robbed him. Prisoner then made use of some very bad language, and began to fight, when a general scuffle ensued, and the prosecutor was kuocked down. The prisoner was kneeling on the prosecutor when the pocket book was pulled out of his bosom. Before prisoner could do anything he wa3 pulled off, and then witness saw him hold up the book in his hand as if about to throw it away, when it was snatched from him by Stevenson. Rowley then came up and took them to the camp. By Detective Rowley—Saw the book examined at the camp. The one produced is the same. There was no LlO in it: only a bill of exchange and some papers. James Rowley, sworn, deposed— I am a detective officer stationed at Quecnstown. About 12 o'clock on the night of the 4th inst. I received information that a robbery had been committed at the Digger's Rest Hotel. lat once proceeded there, when prosecutor told me he had been robbed of his pocket book, describing its contents. The book was handed to me by Stevenson, who said he had taken it out of prisoner's hand. I then arrested the prisoner. The book contained what had been mentioned to me by the prosecutor, with the exception of the bank note. The prisoner on being searched, was found to have in his possession one L 5 note, four LI notes, and some silver, together with some papers. Prisoner, in defence, said the prosecutor must have given him the book. He was very drunk, and could not otherwise account for the possession of it. Had been in company with prosecutor and his mate nearly all day: they had been buying stores together. Had known prosecutor's mate between six and eight years. Hadonly come ill on Sunday, and prosecutor came on Monday morning. Committed to trial at the next session of the Supreme Court in Dunedin. Assault.—Monaghan v. Howard.—This was a mining case ooncerning a piece of disputed ground, the defendant asserting that plaintiff had aken up a portion of his claim. After a considerable amount of discussion, his Worship considered the assault proved, though the plaintiff was decidedly in the wrong concerning his right to the ground he claimed. Fined 405., or 48 hours imprisonment. Hawkes v. Fowler.—Claim for L 3, for balance of wages. Defendant pleaded not indebted, except to the extent of one-fourth of the amount claimed, which he had paid into Court. He was one of a party of four, and the plaintiff had been engaged by the party as laborer. The claim not paying, the party had broken up, and the others had gone away prospecting. He had not engeged plaintiff, but one of the party named Mark Glass had. Verdict for plaintiff with costs.

Brown v. Black and Gordon.—Claim for LI9 19s. lid. Not indebted.

J. C. Brown deposed that he was a storekeeper at Qucenstown, and Mr. Black had opened au account with him on the 10th March, since which time plaintiff had supplied him with various stores, on account of the s.s. Nugget." Defendant said that it was not on their aceount but on that of the steamboat company, that the goods had been obtained. There was then a case pending in Dunedin betweon the plaintiff and the company, which would bring their affairs to an issue. He was only a shareholder. Had paid money on account of the company. The compauy were in debt. Verdict for plaintiff against Mr. Black as treasurer for the company. Werner and Johnson v. Black and Gordon.— This was a similar case to the above, on account

of the Dora, in getting the Nuggetoff the Queenstown Reef. , „ , , . Verdict for plaintiffs, defendant as treasurer for the steamboat company. . Olevitch v. Werner and Johnson.—Claim for L 4 10s., balance of wages and expenses. Verdict for full amount and costs. Welsh v. Glogoski.—No appearance, case dismissed. _,, . „ - rt - Worth v. Rebello.—Claim for L 6 for wages. Verdict for full amount and costs. Whiting v. Mcars.—Claim for LI2 10s. for ■wages. Verdict for full amount and costs. Rowley v. Nelson, and Nelson v. Rowley.— This was a cross action —Mr. Rowley, who is proprietor of " Rowley's Express," claiming L2 145., for conveyance of a parcel of newspapers from the Dunstan to Queenstown, and Mr. Nelson, owner of the " Royal Mail Express," charging Rowley with detaining the papers till they were unsaleable, and claiming LIS damages thereupon. It was agreed to postpone both cases for the production of witnesses, till the 26th instant. George v. Elliott.—Claim for L 6, for the detention of a saddle. Samuel George deposed that he bought the saddle at the Dunstan, of a man named Coutts, who is a packer between Queenstown and the Dunstan, for L 6, as he wished to bring his wife here. It is a side saddle. He subsequently lent it to Mr. Dollimore, of the Shotover, when it was seen and claimed by Mr. Elliott. Defendant stated he had lent the saddle on

hire to Coutts, and he had no right to sell it or dispose of it in any way. He had never given him permission to do so. Remanded for the production of Coutts. Cassius v. Morrison.—No appearance of defendant Plaintiff proved service of summons on defendant's clerk. He had received L 5 since it was issued. Verdict for LI3 9s. and costs. Morrison v. Macpherson.—No appearance: case dismissed. Morrison v. Burke.—No appearance: case dismissed. Anderson v. Lewis.—This was an action for breach of contract. No appearance of defendant. Plaintiff stated that he had purchased a horse of Lewis on the 6th instant, and paid 10s. on account. The horse was to be delivered at Bracken's Hotel, and plaintiff had left the balance due there. The price was L3O. He did not do so, but I saw him shortly afterwards at the Arrow, when he promised to bring it in on the following day. As he did not fulfil his promise I saw him again, and at last he said he should keep the horse, as he had sold it too cheap. Verdict for LlO damages, and L9los expenses. Edwards v. Griffin.—No appearance: case dismissed. Thomas v. Lawrenson and Cameron. —Claim for LI 6, for building a stone chimney. Cose dismissed.

Craigan v. Another.—No appearance: case dismissed. Myhill v. Murphy.—No appearance: case diamissed M'Gowan and Party v. Gleashan and Party.— This was a case of a disputed claim.

James M'Gowan deposed that he and his mates had taken up a claim at Butcher's Point. It was a beach claim—four men's ground. They worked from bieakfast till dinner time, when two of Gleashan's party came down to where they were working and told them it was their ground, and threatened if they did not leave off working to throw them into the river. The claim was not being worked. Plaintiff then left the ground, and on the Monday following pegged out a claim some distance from the last. (Plan of ground handed in.) There were no pegs driven in, and no one was working thertv The defendant Gleashan then insisted that that was also their ground, and ordered them off. Plaintiff told them they could not hold two claims, and refused to go. Gleashan kept striking the pick before his, and prevented him working, afterwards seizing the pick and throwing him down, when he wrenched it from plaintiff and threw it into the river. They said they would work both claims, and refused to submit the case lo the decision of the Commissioner.

By defendant—l did not draw the pick on you. James Martin, mate of plaintufs, corroborated the foregoing evidence. By defendant—You came with picks and shovels, cursing and threatening, like a lot of wild savages. There are several of you, and you jump every claim there worth having. You claimed 50 feet a man. 128 feet were marked out in the first claim.

Isaac Leigh, another of plaintiffs mates, gave similar evidence.

Patrick Gleashan. sworn, deposed that he had taken up the ground some time ago, and they •were building a hut at the time plaintiff took up their claim. There were four in their party, but they had divided, two working at one place, and two at another. They held only two men's ground in each place. Plaintiff insisted on working in spite of them, and kept striking the pick in the ground close to defendant's feet, who civilly requested him not to do that. Plaintiff then kept winding the pick round defendant's head, and in self defence he took the pick from him and threw it into the river.

Verdict for defendants, his worship ordering them to re-mark their claims to the limits prescribed by the Goldfields Rules. Assault.—M'Gowan v. Gleashan.—The plaintiff in the previous case charged the defendant, Patrick Gleashan with assaulting him, in the manner already described. The evidence was much the same* as before. His worship held the assault proved, and fined defendant 20s. and costs.