RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Volume I, Issue 52, 8 May 1863, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before M. Price, Esq., R.M.) Tuesday, sth Mat, 1863. Larceny. — James Lynch was charge stealing sundry articles, value 12 property of James Smith, on the 4tbT James Smith deposed that he was p residing at Invercargill. On Mohdi inst., went up to Mr Miller's to repai papering. At ahout twenty minutes tc o'clock at night, left the articles in qu consisting of two paint brushes, a scissors and a hammer, on Mr Miller step. When witness returned in abi minutes* the articles in question were In the mean time several parties hai by . witness, being uncertain whetht had the aitieles in question or not, w them, but could not discover the- arti any of the passengers. Went and gav< mution to the police. Met theprisonei an hour after this, close to the Union in possession of the missing articles, him to stop,, as he had my property possession. He said he would not. V, told the defendant he wanted the without any bother, and did not wis any farther in the matter! By this til ha.d got opposite to the- police. jj prisoner again said he would not give articles, but was going to- get sometl eat. Plaintiff identified the articles pr in court as his property. ■ By Defendant—Plaintiff noticed tl fendant had been drinking. Defendant admitted that he had tai articles, but alleged that he was into; at the timeSergeant Chapman deposed that he* pursuit of defendant, whom he overtoi the- stolen property in his possession fendant appeared to be under the infln drink,, but was walking very steadi smartly down the street. Witna noticed him for some months walking town without any visible employment. Defendant said in defence that tb geant admitted that he was tapping paling with the hammer— should h done that if he had intended to con* articles? His character never had to peached before, and he shonld not hat here on the present occasion only fi influence of drink. Had been up at t gings, but was a stranger here. Was a job on Saturday by-Mr Campbell. The Court observed that defendantl the same excuse as many others did. men Jdrink tbey may commit robb murder, or any other offence. The j drunkenness was not the slightest ju tion, on the contrary, it greatly enhan magnitude of the offence. If men i sober senses got drunk, they conn offence. Every crime committed aft* is an addititional offence. One moni prisonment with bard labor. A RowDY.y-John Batie waa chai Sergeant Purcell with being drunk a orderly on the 4th inst. Defendant a the charge. Fined 10s. NAaaow Escape. — Jsmes Humphi charged with being in a place of publi with intent to commit a felony, onl instant. JohnPetie deposed that he was a living at Winton Bush ; hadnoaequi with defendeant. Was drunk on . and had not the slightest recollection thing that passed at that time. Alexander Wylie deposed that h store-keeper, residing at Centre Bin acquainted with plaintiff j who was d the Albion Hotel, in the tap room, lai Saw defendant take plaintiff ji 4 waißto and rifle it, then put on the coat* and same. On witness asking him what doing with it, he said he was nierelj care of it till the* morrow. Was | sober ; defendant had had a glass or J was sober enough to know what he wa Plaintiff had three other mates, the him. Defendant made no, attempt cealment, but was going out of the winess and another had not stoppt Witness never left plaintiff, all night to town especially to see him. Sergeant Chapman deposed that known defendant to be daily about th streets for the last five or six montl ticularty at the Albion HoteL;- Hi noticed him employed in any worl town.;-' : <."< v" .•.-■• A :... -a A ' i r Defendant said in defence that the I had never happened tb come where! work. Could produce parties for w was working bn Satu?day and Mondi beeen working for Mr. Wright at the also for the last five, months never .idle day.-.- ,-,-.-..• ' ■„■ -;*.;- vv-vr-'Y The Court referred to ,the vwordf ; Police Ordinance respecting Vagrancj suspected person or reputed thief, '; ,f ing the public quays,7or thdrbugMi with intent to commit a felony,;'' served that this; Vagrancy '"Very' sharp but at the, same 5 time a t cellent act— one of the very best| quired great judgment and discreti

H n

use by the Ma^strate. If defendant fcould produce safe-factory evidence that he was an honest, hard working man, his Worship -would loot pass sentence. This case was ordered to stand over, while Mr Wright was sent for, as the late employer of defendant, to give him a character. . The constable reported that Mr Wright would not consent to leave his work to come at defendant's request. The Court hoped this would be a caution to defendant ; if brought up again on the . slightest suspicion, he cbuld not be \ treated with such lenie.icy. It was drunkenness that brought defendant intotrouble ; this was a very lucky escape for him. His "Worship advised defendant to go and work hard and earn an honest livelihood, and not appear there again in such a position. Discharged. Obstructing the Footpath.— S. Shepherd, charged by Constable Tewhy with obstructing the public thoroughfare in Taystreet, on 29th ult. In this case, in -which judgment was deferred till to-day, the Court said that certainly it was a most decided obstruction of the thorougfare, when parties take a cart on j*the foot path. The Police Ordinance, referring to the matter says, " any parties obstructing the highways in any way not hereinbefore mentioned." This case had nothing to do with the proclamation of the foot-paths; if a person put a cart on the road so as to compel passengers to go off the footpath, that constitutes an offence against ihe Ordinance in question. The Sergeant of the Court did not wish to press the case against defendant, but merely to get a legal verdict on the question. The Court dismissed the defendant on payment of costs, with a caution against repetition of Ihe offence. WEDNEBDAT, 6TH MAY. Arson.— Wm. M'Taggart, Mokomoko, was accused of having, on the night of the sth or morning of the 6th instant, wilfully attempted to set fire to the premises known as the Golden Fleece Hotel. Prisoner, who was defended by Mr South, pleaded not guilty. From the evidence it appeared that accused, after settling some accounts in town, went to the Golden Fleece at night in a state of intoxication. After having some brandy and ginger- beer, he complained of having lost or being robbed of L2O. Being refused any more liquor, he .went out to the verandah, where A*r Lang, proprietor, asserted he was seen about 12 o'clock. Shortly afterwards the constah c on the beat observed a fire beginning to 6pread at one portion of the building, ard prisoner walking away from it. He was immediately apprehended. After evidence had been heard, the case was remanded till next day. Accused was liberated on bail, himself in LIOO, and two sureties of LSO each. Thursday, 7th May. Inebriates. — John Stevenson, a "new chum," for being drunk, was fined 5?. and costs. Thomas Edwards was also fined 10» and costs for the same offence. 1 Out of His Reckoning. — Daniel Delany was charged with Jbeing on tlie premises of R. G. Hoskins for an unlawful purpose. Piisoner admitted being within the building, but denied having any unlawful intent. His Worship, with an admonition, dismissed him. Arson. — Wm. M'Taggart was brought up on remand, and charged with the above offence. Mr South, in an address of great length to the Bench, endeavored to show that there was not a prima facie case to w arrant a committal. He called on Mr Blacklock, of Calder, Blacklock and Co., who deposed to knowing accused since he came to to tke province. He paid his accounts regularly, and on Tuesday paid the firm L4O. Witness considered accused a most unlikely person to commit such an offence. Mr South offered to produce other witnesses to the same effect, but the Bench thought it was needless. This closed the case. His Worship said he had given the case his most serious consideration. If sitting in a magisterial capacity, all the very ablearguA Vments of Mr South should have to be con 'sidered, and, if a doubt existed, the party accused should have the benefit. But he was there ministerially to enquire into a criminal offence, aud, if sufficient evidence was shown, to send it to a jury. He was not sitting there as a judge— he had no business to judge in the matter. The simple question was — was there a prima facie case? Mr South urged that no conviction would t; follow on the evidence offered, and asked fi r i non-committal. C His Worship said this would be a most j dangerous doctrine- it was making him both t judge and jury. After quoting authorities on the subject, he said that, in his opinion, J there was sufficient evidence to warrant committal. Prisoner was accordingly committed to k take his trial at the Supreme Court, to be ' held in Invvercargill, in July next. The same amount of bail and sureties were accepted. f