RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5084, 10 July 1877, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Monday, July 9. (Before J. C. Crawferd, Esq., E.M.) MALICIOUS INJURY.

John Malcom McCallum and George Dye were charged with malicious injury to property. They pleaded not guilty. Captain Henry Bate deposed that he was master of the ship Broomhall. On Saturday night, at 11 o’clock, went to his cabin and found that the lock of his desk had been broken open, and the lock of his cash-box had been forced. At this stage of the proceedings a remand was asked for, because it appeared that the captain had missed other things from the cabin, and he desired to produce evidence as to the theft. In reply to his Worship, the captain stated his belief that Lye had no more to do with the matter further than having been in the other prisoner’s company. Both prisoners were remanded till next day. DRUNKENNESS. A number of persons were fined for this offence. One, having behaved himself in a very disorderly manner, was fined 40s. and costs ; in default seven days’ imprisonment. A CROSS ASSAULT CASE. The case of MoGuirk v. Murtagh, and vice versa, for assault, came on for hearing, both sides being represented by counsel. Mr. Buckley, for McGuirk, asked for a remand, on the ground that his client having been arrested suddenly, had not had sufficient time to produce his witness. A subpoena had been issued, but the witness did not appear likely to attend. Mr. Ollivier (for the other man) had no objection to the remand, provided his client was admitted to bail on his own recognizance. Mr. Buckley pointed out that McGuirk had been compelled to find two sureties in £SO each, besides his own recognizance. Mr. Ollivier remarked that when McGuirk was first arrested the appearance of Murtagh was such as to lead to the supposition that the assault had been of a very serious nature. Mr! Crawford was of opinion that the bail in that case was rather excessive, and he should admit both the men to bail in this instance on their own recognizances. UNPROVOKED ASSAULT. A charge had been brought against Alex. McMillan of assaulting William Donald. Mr. Allan appeared on behalf of the complainant, Mr. Buckley for defendant. Mr. Allan stated that the plaintiff had decided not to proceed with the case, defendant having made ample apology and engaged to pay all costs of the action. ALLEGED FORGERY OF A PROMISSORY NOTE. Charles Cook was brought up on remand charged with forging an endorsement to a promissory note in the name of Charles Mclntyre. Mr. Buckley appeared for the prosecution, Mr. Allan for the defence. Lionel Harris was called, and deposed that the prisoner had come to him with the note produced. It was a renewal of a former promissory note, which was endorsed with the same signature. Prisoner specified who the Charles Mclntyre was whose name appeared on the note, saying he was a baker in Tory-street. He saw prisoner just after the note came to maturity, and the bill produced, bearing the same endorsement as the bill marked C, was left at witness’s office by prisoner. It was intended to be a renewal of the old bill. Charles Mclntyre was examined as to the endorsements on the back of the promissory notes referred to in the evidence given by the last witness, and he swore that they were not his signatures, neither did he authorise Cook or anyone else to put his signature to them. In reply to the usual question to prisoner, his counsel stated the defence would be reserved. Prisoner was then formally committed to take his trial at the next sittings of the Supreme Court. On the application of Mr. Allan, bail was allowed—prisoner in £2OO, and two sureties of £IOO each. BREACHES OP MUNICIPAL BY-LAWS. Mr. John Johnston appeared on a remand information, charging him with allowing a nuisance to exist on his property, being an acre and a-half of ground in Tory-street. Mr. Allan appeared for the defence, and raised a technical objection to the information as having been wrongly laid, and stated that the ground was being fenced in, and there would henceforth be a stoppage to persons depositing offensive matter ou the ground. This being proved to be the case, the information was dismissed.

A similar case against Mrs. Langdon, for keeping the back yard of her premises in a filthy condition, was withdrawn.