THE COURTS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 238, 1 October 1908, Page 2

THE COURTS.

By Telegraph.—Press Association. Ghrietehurch, Last Night. Crnciofl Wilson appeared liefore AJv. V. 0. Day, S.M,. this morning, charged with on Aiigu-l 22m1. at Sydenham, signing a fictitious nanio to a claim for enrolment, also with on ihe same date wilfully misleading the licgi.-trar of Elcclors ibv signing sncli a name. After tile hearing of evidence the. Magistrate said in- could hardly credit the defendant's version, He would dismi-s Ihe charge of misleading the Registrar, but on Clio other charge would iuliict a line of t,'> and costs. At the Lvllolton I'olice Court this morning, liefore Mr. H. \V. Bishop, 5..M.. a steward named John Dnnlop, on remand from Wellington, was charged willi having on September lilth.at Lyttellou. used obscene liingiingn in a publie place on board the steamer M-mo-wai, and also witli having at the same time and place assaulted Sergeant Patrick Ryan while in the execution of his duty. Iu recording a convict ion, 31 r. HMiup said lie intended to line svensed a considerable amount. Such conduct was absolutely inexcusable, lie would give the accused a very severe lesson. The charge of using obscene language would be dismissed, but for assaulting Sergeant Ityan accused would bu lined €lO, in default three months. imprisonment.

Wellington, Last Night. At the Magistrate's Court to-day, Mr W. (;. Kidded dismissed the information laid by Edward .1. Searle against Leo Do Laval and Constable llavelock (in sepat.ite cases), charging both with perjury. The charges arose out of a late civil claim for wages preferred by De Laval successfully against Searle. The informant jn the present ease swore that, De Laval and Haveloek had testified falsely on a very material point in this civil claim. In dismissing the information against De Laval, his Worship said that in a private prosecution like the present it was absolutely 'essential that the informant should'take care that liis evidence should be of such a strength Chat a prima facie ease must be made out. After hearing independent evidence, he was quite sure that such precautions had not been taken.' In this respect informant's conduct was reprehensible. Considering the evidence for the prosecution and impartial witnesses his Worship was quite confident no jury would convict defendant of tlie charge. He reserved his decision regarding costs. No evidence was called against Haveloek, and liis Worship dismissed the information.

Mr. W. tt. Riddell, S.M., to-day heard tlie cases brought against five wharf laborers, William Albert Parker, James Swanson McMillan, Allan Anderson, Hugh Neilson and Hans Siversen, for alleged cargo broaching from the steamer Rippingham (irahge. The charge against McMillan was dismissed. The others were committed to 'the Supreme Court for trial. Ceorgc Edward Smith and Charlotte Elizabeth Smith were remanded to appear at Dunedin on October :il on a charge of ill-treating a girl Ui years of age. Auckland, Tuesday. A somewhat peculiar ease came before Mr. Kettle, S.M., at the Police Court this afternoon, when Agnes Sarah

Fleming, for whom Mr McVeigh appeared, was Ordered to pay 7s Cd per week towards the maintenance of her husband, Andrew Fleming, who, it was alleged, was a destitute person. Tho defence contended that the applicant was nut a Restitute person being quite mblo to perform light employment, while it was claimed, on the otJier hand, that he could not get work, and that liis wife had property worth £3500 and should support him.' The Magistrate, . in making the order, left it open to either party to move for a revision. Wellington, Wednesday.

At the Wellington Magistrate's Court to-day, Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M., gave judgment on the charges under the Shipping and Seamen Act against Captain Nilclill'e, master of the tongariro. The defendant was charged with having failed to discharge a certain seaman (who had been transferred to another vessel of tile same company) in the presence of the Superintendent of Marine, and secondly with having failed to sign and give to this seaman a certificate of discharge. The Magistrate lleld that (lie admitted facts did not amount to termination of engagement and it was not an offence, under the first charge; but in regard to the second charge he considered that, even in ease of transfer of seamen from one ship to another shipmasters should comply with section 50, which defendant had not done. A fine of 20s, 'with £3 10s costs, was imposed.