RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1253, 16 October 1884, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Geraldine— Wednesday, Oct. 15, 1884. [Before H. 0. Baddely, Esq., R.M., and Rev. G. Barclay, J.P.] ALLEGED LARCENY.

Robert Mackay was charged, on the information of Detective Kirby, that he did on the 4th day of October, 1884, nt Orari, feloniously steal, take and carry away certain money to the amount of £260 belonging to Samuel Breadley, hotel-keeper, of Orari. Mr Hamersley appeared for the accused.

Inspector Broham, who appeared on behalf of the prosecution, stated that he had taken voluminous evidence in regard to the case, and from it he could not see that there would be any chance of a prima facie case being established against the accused ; but there was sufficient to show there was suspicion against him whereby he was arrested Mr Jdamersley remarked that the case had been remanded from Timaru since last Wednesday, and bail had been refused. He would ask, now that the case had assumed such a turn, that the constable who hhd arrested the accused should be put in the witness box in order that he might ask him a few questions. There were two parties to the matter at issue, and he wished for some evidence in regard to the case, so as to show by whom the information was laid. The Bench remarked that that was a Matter that should be brought before the Minister of Justice, and not before the Bench. There could not be a committal without a prima facie case being first considered by the Bench as such. The Inspector ot Police had a mass of evidence before him, and he had stated in open Court that he had not evidence sufficient for & prima facie case. Mr Hamersley contended that the legal evidence should be produced fit the lime the accused was arrested. It was only justice that the accused should be allowed to clear bis character.

The Bench, on the remarks on the case made by Inspector Broham, dismissed the case.

Mr Hamersley asked that he should be supplied with a copy of the' evidence adduced.

Inspector Broham said that was a most unusual application, inasmuch as what he had prepared for the Court was his own private notes. The Bench remarked that Mr Hamersley was only entitled to a copy of evidence taken in Court. As evidence was not given, the Bench had no right to order a copy of the Inspector’s notes to be given to the accused’s solicitor. CIVIL OASES. J. S. Waite v. J. Bell—Claim £l4 2s ; judgment summons.—The defendant was examined at some length by the plaintiff. Ultimately the defendant was ordered to pay half the amount iu one month, and the remainder in two months, from date of the judgment, or in default of either payment one month’s imprisonment. Several other civil cases were settled cut of Court.