MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Oamaru Mail, Volume II, Issue 386, 19 July 1877, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

THIS DAY. (Before T. W. Parker, Esq., R.M.) STEALING A POTATO FORK. John Tennant, on remand, was again placed in the dock on a charge of having stolen a potato fork at Boundary Creek on the 24th May last, valued 7s. 6d., the property of Charles Jackson. Mrs. Thompson now deposed that about the 24th May a man went to her house and offered to sell a potato fork for ss. ; but could not recognise the man, as it was dark at the time. The evidence of Joseph Jackson, brother to the prosecutor, having been taken, His Worship dismissed the charge, saying that it appeared to him to be a mixed up thing between the prisoner and the man Trueman. Sub-Inspector Smith having stated that there was a warrant in existence for the arrest of Trueman, the fork was ordered to be retained by the police. SLY GROG CELLING. William Walker was charged, on the information of Sub-Inspector Smith, with having on the 6th instant, at Kakanui north, sold a glass of brandy to one Thomas Lindsay, without being licensed to sell alcoholic liquors. Sub-Inspector Smith conducted the prosecution, and Mr. O'Meagher appeared for the defence, who denied the charge. | Thomas Lindsay, blacksmith, residing at Maheno, deposed that he knew the defendant, and had seen him at Kakanui on the 6th instant, at his boarding-house there. There were several persons present besides the defendant and witness. They were sitting talking and having a drink. Mr. Young asked witness if he would have a drink, and he had some brandy. The drink was got from a place in the corner of the room. They had some more drinks afterwards, which were called for by Aikenhead, but he could not say whether Walker or his wife served them. Witness had another glass of brandy. Witness did not pay for this, but thought he had paid for the first glass of brandy he had that evening. Several persons were present when he had the first glass of brandy. He thought he paid 2s. for four drinks which were for Walker, Cockburn, Young and witness. Walker had beer ; Young, lemonade and raspberry, and Cockburn and witness, brandy. He gave Mrs. Lindsay 2s. 6d., and she returned him 6d.

Cross-examined by Mr. O'Meagher: Witness would swear that he paid for drinks that night, but he would not swear positively that it was for the first drinks he had. He thought he was sober, but a drunken man does not think himself drunk. He had only two drinks that night, and he had not tasted any other drinks during the day. He would not swear that Young did not get a sandwich at the time. Witness was satisfied that it was brandy which he had. He did not remember hearing Young calling for the drinks. He would not swear that Young did not ask him to have a drink before he had the first glass of brandy. He would not swear that Walker was present when he gave Mrs. Walker the half-crown. He was positive that he paid for the first glass he had that night. He would swear that he paid for the first drinks. His reason for thinking the brandy was taken from a bottle was that there were a number of bottles in the place from which it was obtained. Sub-Inspector Smith then asked to be permitted to amend the information by insertingthe words' 'orpermittobe sold,&c. Mr. O'Meagher objected to the adoption of such a course, as it was taking him by surprise. The Magistrate said the amendment could scarcely be made without prejudice to the defendant. The amendment might be made by the Court, but not irrespective of the defendant. After some consultation, it was agreed to amend the information by striking out the word " sold," and substituting the words " permit to be sold." The case was then adjourned until the 27th inst. ANOTHER CASE. A second charge was preferred against William Walker, for having on the 7th inst. sold one glass of brandy and one glass of beer, to William Millar. Sub-Inspector Smith again prosecuted, and Mr. O'Meagher appeared for the defendant, who denied the charge. William Millar gave evidence to the effect that on the 7th July he was at Walker's boardinghouse, in the presence of a man named Donaldson. Donaldson and witness indulged in a game of "Yankee grab," for drinks, the dice being provided by defendant. Witness lost, and paid defendant Is. for the two drinks. Witness had a glass of brandy, and he believed Donaldson had brandy also. The liquor was obtained from a cupboard in the bedroom, and was in one of Hennessy's pale brandy bottles. In cross-examination by Mr. O'Meagher, witness said that the hotelkeepers had not told him that if defendant was convicted they would give him L 5 each. He would swear that he paid defendant Is. for the drinks. James Donaldson, a tinsmith, residing at Kakanui, was also examined, and stated that he remembered being in the defendant's house with the last witness on the 7th July. Millar callenged him to shake "Yankee grab" for two drinks. They threw, and Millar lost. They both had brandy, Millar paying for the two drinks to Walker. The brandy was obtained from a bottle which defendant took from cupboard in the room. In reply to Mr. O'Meagher, witness said he saw Millar pay Walker the Is. ; he saw Millar put it into Walker's hand, but he could not say what he did with it. He met Millar at Walker's by accident. Mr. O'Meagher ther Ilasked that the case might be adjourned in c.der that he

could bring witnesses to rebnt some of the statements of the Millar. r~: • The Bench said it was cont..;ry to tho practice of the Court to grant an adjournment for the purpose of piling up contradictory evidence. It would be impolitic to grant an adjournment, as there was nothing to justify such a course being resorted to. Mr. O'Meagher then commented on the evidence, expressing groat doubt as to the credibility of the witness Millar. JLe pointed out the ditt'eronce of Uio statements of the two witnesses with regard to the passing of the money, which was tho main point in the supporting of tho charge. His Worship, in giving judgment, said there was not sufficient to warrant him disbelieving the evidence, and lie must therefore convict tho defendant, who would be fined LlO, including costs.