MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 465, 5 August 1909, Page 3

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

The monthly sitting of the Magistrate’s Court was held before Mr A. D. Thomson, S.M., yesterday. DRUNKENNESS. John Moran charged with drunkenness, pleaded guilty and was. fined ss, in default 24 hours’ hard labour. ON PREMISES WITHOUT LAWFUL EXCUSE. Charles Henricks was charged on the information of the police with being found by night without lawful excuse iu the Foxtou Public School. Sub : lnspector O’Donovan conducted the case on behalf of the police.

The Magistrate said that the accused could if he desired have the case tried before a jury. The accused agreed to have the case dealt with summarily and pleaded guilty. He said that he had only come in from his camp that day, and had had a few drinks and had wandered up to the school. If he were discharged he would immediately return to the camp. The Sub-Inspector said that on the night in question the accused went into a room in the school which was unlocked, bolted the door from the inside, lit a lamp and also lit a fire for the purpose of cooking. Accused had several previous convictions against him, and had been sentenced in Palmerston last September to three months’ imprisonment for vagrancy. Some years ago he had

received two years’ imprisonment for burglary. The Magistrate sentenced accused to three months’ hard labour in Wellington gaol. AI.EEGED THEFT. John William Anderson, who was brought before local justices recently on a charge of the theft of a pair of boots, and the justices after hearing the evidence dismissed the case without prejudice, was again charged on the information of the police with the same offence. The Magistrate said that the case had been tried by justices and dismissed. Although the justices had dismissed it without prejudice, if a full and complete trial had been given the man should have his liberty, and it was not right that he should be put on trial again for the same offence. Of course if fresh evidence was being ’led, that it was impossible to obtain at the first trial, he would be prepared to hear the case but at the same time it would have to be proved to him in the case of fresh evidence that it was impossible to . obtain it at the first trial. The case would be dismissed. ON LICENSED PREMISES AFTER HOURS. J. Webb and L. Wilson were charged on the information of the police with being found on licensed premises after hours. They both pleaded guilty and were fined los each with costs 7s. ■ . CIVII, CASES. Judgment for plaintiffs was entered up in the following undefended civil cases: —Austin and Park v. Wm. Moffatt, claim £2 x 3s qd, costs 10s; Nash and Co. v. Fred Yanko, £io*gs 3d, costs £1 10s 6d ; E. Barnes v, Walter Anderson, £1 7s, costs ss; Tatton and -Son v. Jas. Andrew, £2 ss, costs ios,*R. N. Speirs v. W. J. Pye, £l3 3$ Bd, costs £x 10s 6d. In the case of Nash and Co. v. A. Wynd, claim ns id, the defendant - produced receipts for '£3 and sail that he had paid the account in full but was unable to find the balance of the receipts. The Magistrate said the onus of proof was on the defendant, and judgment would have to be entered up for the balance £1 ns id with costs ss.

trouble; over rabbit traps. William George Tozer was charged on the information of the police with unlawfully stealing 19 rabbit traps valued at ,£1 5s 4d, the property of Arthur Fee. Sub-Inspector O’Donovan conducted the case on behalf of the police. Defendant was represented by Mr Cooper and pleaded not guilty. The following evidence was

taken. Arthur Fee stated that he was V rabbiting on the properties of v ‘ Messrs Purcell, Coley, Coker and Robinson. He had from 80 to 100 traps set. Lost 26 traps from Mr Purcell’s property about the middle of July. Missed 14 one day and three or four days later missed a further 12. Informed the police of the loss and in company with Constable Woods visited the residences of Messrs Wilson, Robinson and Tozer. At the latter place ten traps were found, the majority of which witness recognised as belonging to him. He identified them by the manner in which he had sharpened the pins and also : Wby the new plates he had put on some. At this point the witness picked out from the traps in the court X2f which he considered be- - longed to him. Four of the ones selected were marked “L” but witness said that no marks were on them when in his possession. The witness was cross-examined at some length by Mr Cooper in reference to the number of traps lost by rabbiters through being carried away by animals. William Woodham said that he had been rabbiting with Fee for some years. .He identified some of the traps as belonging to Fee by the manner in which they were filed. George Langley, in evidence, stated that about 12 months ago he purchased traps. He marked them all with an “L.” Tozer and' his nephew have done some trapping with them. He

had told Tozer that he could use them whenever he wanted to.

Constable Woods stated that on July 2 ist Fee came to him and reported the loss of 26 traps. In consequence of this he went round to Tozer's house and found ten traps there in a shed, which Fee identified as his. Saw Tozer later on and took possession of the traps. Tozer said he had some other traps, and the same evening brought 18 to the Court House. Fee came and examined the traps the following morning and picked out 19 as belonging to him. This concluded the evidence for the prosecution. Mr Cooper contended that there was no case to answer- It appeared from the evidence of witnesses that it anyone picked up a trap which had been carried away by an animal, they usually kept it. He intended to call witnesses to prove that the traps had been purchased by Tozer and Langley. The Magistrate said that it was not a case for a conviction. There were too many uncertainties about the matter altogether. Of course if Mr Cooper desired to call evidence he could do so.

Mr Cooper said that under the circumstances his client would not call his witnesses, as the Magistrate, having decided to dismiss the case, it would only be wasting the time of the Court.

. The Magistrate dismissed the case. He said that though the case was dismissed it did not follow that none of the - traps had belonged to Mr Fee. Mr Tozer and his children had found one or two traps, and if Mr Fee could prove that they belonged to him, no doubt Mr Tozer would hand them over.

Mr Tozer said that he would be pleased to hand to Mr Fee any traps that he had found that belonged to him.