Resident Magistrate’s Court.

Marlborough Express, Volume IV, Issue 154, 23 January 1869, Page 5

Resident Magistrate’s Court.

BLENHEIM, MONDAY, JAN. IBfch, 1869. [Before S. L. Muller, Esq., R.M.] POLICE CASE. Richard Smith was charged by Inspector Kinerson with stealing a coat, on the evening of’ Saturday, the 16th Just , from the Royal Hotel, the 'properly of Mr. J. Connell:

Aiex. Fabian, barman at the Royal lit. tel, deposed that he (witness) was in the billiard-room between 6 and 7 o’clock m the evening of Saturday last. Saw the prisoner, w ho was outside, looking at him ihrough the billiard-roorn window Saw him go in the direction of the bar; thought his ajipearance was suspicious. ibisoner

was without a coat when he first saw him. Saw him afterwards crossing the bridge in Auckland street with a coat on—-like the one now produced The bridge is three or four hundred yards from the Royal Hotel. Could not identify the coat at that distance, but could distinguish the color. Suspected it to have been stolen. Went immediately and looked in the passage, and found one missing like the one in Court. Went in pursuit of prisoner, and met him coming hack without the coat. Accused him of taking it, which he denied, and told witness he did not. know what lie was saying. Prisoner then 'vent towards the town. W ilness then saw Mrs. Hannan, and asked her if she had seen a man pass. She said she had seen a man going towards some flax-bushes in a paddock, about 300 yards from the bridge. Witness went to the flax-bush with Messrs. Connell and Pitt. Mr. Pitt found the coat there, and gave it to witness.

By the Court.—Was certain the prisoner is the man he saw looking through Ihe window, and whom he met subsequently in Auckland-street. Saw the coat hanging in the passage on Saturday morning. Pointed prisoner out to the police on the same evening, and gave him in charge.

Mary Hannan deposed that she lived in Auckland-street. Did not know the prisoner. Saw a man going down Auck-land-street about 6 o’clock on Saturday last. Her impression at the lime was that the man was seeking a place to hide in. He was stooping and walking quickly towards the flax Saw no other person going there until she saw the last witness. The man she saw had a coat on ol a grey color, like the one she afterwards saw in the hands of last witness.

Harry Pitt, solicitor, Blenheim, deposed that on Saturday evening last, while at lea at the Royal Hotel, the barman, Fabian, came into the room and told Mr. Connell that some one had stolen Ids (Mr. C.’s) coat, and had gone over the bridge at the hack ol the house in Auckland-streHl. Fabian then got on a horse and galloped in the direction indicated.. He and Mr. Connell crossed the paddock at the back of the Royal Hotel, and reached pyisonef, at the same lime as Fabian. Asked .Ihe\ prisoner where his coat was, and what he \ had done with it. He replied that he did \ not understand what witness meant. Fabian then made enquiries o( the lust witnesss, who pointed to the place from which the prisoner was coming, and where the coal was found. Could identify the coat now’ produced. John Connell,- residing at the Royal

Hotel, corroborated the evidence of last witness. Was present when the coat - was found. Was confident the coat, was his property- It was not new, but was.worth about £2. . ' '

Inspector Emerson arrested the prisoner! on Saturday evening about 6 o’clock; Told him he was accused of stealing a coat. Prisoner made no reply, and he lodged him in the lock-up. , The prisoner had nothing to offer in his defence, and was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment with hard labor in Plcton gaol- . - • MILLS V. ROBINSONThis was an information laid by John Mills against Jamies Robinson, of Spring Creek, for allowing an entire horse to be at large, and from which informant had sustained damage. Mr. Pitt appeared for plaintiff; Mr. Nelson for defendant. , After considerable argument on both sides the Court ruled that the horse was at under the meaning of the statute, but in this case should only inflict the minimum penalty of £2, with £3 costs.

CIVIL CASES. SMART V. AUGARDE. This case arose out of one reported by us lust week, being a claim for £2 3s. 6d. for work done, and materials ! supplied 1 to I van hoe A u garde, deceased, and which was not allowed as part of the! set-off against the estate of the late Ivuuhoe Augarde. John Smart deposed that be was a settler in the Wairau. His wife was a tailoress, and had made some clothes lor Ivnnhoe Augarde some months hetbrediis death. On the Isth October, It?b7, he promised to pay Mrs. Smart on his return I rom the Clarence. hut in cohse>|Ut-nce uf liis death they hud not seen him since that (.ale. rTiie defendant, Henry JS. C. AuI’anle, had acknowledged finding the plaintiff’s account among the papers of deceased, hui had refused. to. pay it,'as lie, .considered plaintiff indebted io il.e estate. Plaintiff ha I settled-the foniur case, ami 'this account' was s ill Asked defendant jor the money on iici-

day last, before serving the summons; payment refused. Judgment for plaintiff for £2 3s. 6d , with £3 costs. H. G. CLARK V. F. ADAMS. A claim for damages to the plaintiff’s garden by Adam’s pigs. William Ferguson, a gardener, has charge of Mr Clark’s garden. There is a good fence between the garden and Adam’s farm, but the pigs are continually breaking through, and trespassing in numbers from 4 to 20. Have been doing so for the last three months; saw them there this morning; considers the damage, up to the time this summons was taken out, to exceed £5.

H. G Clark, owner of the property in question, has seen the pigs in the garden several times. Did not see them on the last occasion, but know they have been in several times since the judgment on a (orcase was settled. The present case is for damages up to the date of plaint. Defendant did not appear. Judgment for plaintiff, damages £5, with £2 18s. costs.