RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume V, Issue 250, 14 November 1872, Page 7

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Thursday, November 7.

(Bofore Vincent Pyke Esq.. R.M , H. Bastings, Esq., J.P., J. F. Herbert,

Esq., J. I\, and Or Stewart J.P.)

Julia Driscoll was brought up on three different charges of obtaining goods under false pretences. It was decided that the evidence for the prosecution on all the charges should be heard before the defence was entered into.

Wm. S. Tennet, drapers assistant, in the employ of Mr. M'Beath, stated that on the 17th ult., accused came to Mr. M'Beath's shop about 1 o'clock. She asked for one pair of gloves for Mrs. Mouat, which were supplied and placed to Mrs. Mouat's accouut. On the 21st ult., accused again came to the shop, and was supplied with 3yds. white muslin, 6£yds flannel, 6^yds» merino, 3yds ribbon, I wool cloud, 1 trimmed hat, 1 pair elastic side boots, and' 3yds white calico. She said she wanted the goods for Mrs. Mouat. The color of the merino she asked for was not in stock, and she was given a pattern to take to Mrs Mouat. She went and shortly afterwardu came back, saying it would do. The articles were entered to Mrs. Mouat's account. On the 24th ult.', laccused again came to Mr. M'Beath's shop, and asked for- -a blue parasol, -a, muff, and a boa for Mrs. Mouat. Witness gave her the parasol; two muffs, and two boas, to see which of the latter would suit Mrs. Mouat. These goods were entered to Mrs. Mouat's account. Identified the goods produced as those supplied to accused. - Cross-examined — Witness l^ew the accused: as. servant to Mrs. Mouat. She obtained . goods on Mrs. Mouat's account on the 6fch and 7th September. „

Alfred Anderßon, bookeeptjr, m Mr. M'Beath's employ, recollected seuing accuaed in M'Beath's shop between 1 and 2 o'clock on the 24ult. She left and returned in about ten minutes. She then brought a boa,' which she said would not s"it Mrs. Motiat. Witness entered the return of the article.

Cross-examined -Witness knew accused had previously procured goods, on Mrs. Mouat's account without a written order. 1

Mrs. Mouat stated she employed accused to run messages occasionally. She never authorised her to procure the articles (produced) or any of the same description, and never saw them till they were in the possession of the police. Cross-examined — Accused occasionally

went out with witness' children. She uid not sleep, bnt often had meals in her (witness,) house. Some two or three mouths ago she attended to witnoss' children. About two months ago .iccused procured a pair of bootsi'rom M'Beath's for witness. Never gave accused any wages, but promised her a dress at Christmas Mr. Mouat asked the girl to come at first to look after the children. That was on a Sunday, and witness asked her to remain the rest of, the week.

Thomas Arthur stated that on the 29th ult., about four o'clock, accused came into his shop and asked for some groceries for Mr. Mouat in the way she usually did. He asked if Mr. Mouat was at home, and accused replied in the affirmative. He supplied one bottle of brandy, one tin marmalade, one tin salmon, one pound butter, a shilling's worth of liquorice, a shilling's worth of lollies, and two pounds almonds. When she first came, accused asked for four pounds of almonds. Witness asked if she had not made a mistake She went out, and in a minute or two returned, and stated two pounds would be enough. Witness saw Mr. Mouat in the evening, and mentioned that he had supplied the girl with the goods. Cross-examined — Accused was in the habit of obtaining goods of a similar description for the -last two months on account of Mr. Mouat.

Mr. Mouat said he never authorised accused on the 29th ult., or any other time, to get any groceries, or anything else, on his account. On the 24th ult he was at home from half-past four till seven o'clock. On going up to the office about the latter hour, he met Mr. Arthur, who mentioned the order that accused had given, as he (Arthur) thought it a singular one. Witness saw accused in the evening. She brought some clothes from the wash, and came only to the door.

Cross-examined— Accused used to come from time to time to take his children for a walk. She was not living in his house, neither was she engaged as a servant. She used to come round with milk, and one morning, about two months ago, he asked' her to cowe round and look after the children. Witness did not know who Mra. Mouat employed as a messenger. Had not received an account from Arthur for two months. He always submitted accounts sent in for groceries to Mrs. Mouat, and if she said they were correct, he paid them.

James Leary, chemist, in the employ of Mr. Jeffery, said that on the 19th inst. accused came to Jeffery's Bhop and asked for three strings of beads on Mrs. Mouat's account. She was supplied with the beads, and they were put down to Mrs. Mouat's account. The articles produced are similar to those supplied. Cross-examined — Had seen accused several times in company with Mr. Mouat's children.

Mrs. Mouat stated that she never authorised accused to procure the beads, and never saw them until then.

Constable Titchener said on the evening of the 29th ult he went to the residence of accused's parents, and saw her and her mother. In reply to witness, accused said she Kad been sent by Mrs. Mouat to Arthur's store, and had procured the articles enumerated by Mr. Arthur, which she had taken to Mrs. Mouat. She then left the house and came home, bringing nothiug with her. Witness again asked her what she had done wish the things, and she adhered to her previous statement. Her father said, "Julia, tell the truth. Accused replied, " It's the truth I'm telling." On the following morning witness returned to the house, and saw the accused and her mother. He told them he had come to make further enquiries, and Mr 3. Driscoll, after hesitating, produced the brandy, buttir, salmon, and marmalade, and said the children had eaten the other things. Witness took charge of the articles. At this time, on witness asking if Julia had brought anything home from M'Beath's, Mrs. Driscoll produced two muffs, the parasol, and boa — bringing them in one at a time. About twelve o'clock witness went away, and returned about two o'clock, and Mrs. Driscoll then produced, after hesitating a little, the gloves, hat, ribbon, wool cloud, boots, muslin flannel, and calico. The same day, in answer to an enquiry whether accused had brought home any heads from Jeffery, Mrs. Dmcoll gave up the beads. Accused said Mrs. Mouat had sent her to Jeffery'a for the beads, and had made her a present of them.

This concluded the evidence for the prosecution

For the defence, Mr. Copland submitted that accused was the acknowledged servant of Mr. Mouat, conseq neatly Messrs M'Beath, Arthur and Jeffery, could sue and recover the amount of the goods obtained from Mr. Mouat, and they could not prosecute criminally ; and that as the accused was under fourteen years of age, it was necessary to prove malice, cunning and deliberation.

The Bench overruled' the first pojnt, and considered that tha evideuce contained sufficient proof of deliberation .

The usual caution was then administered to the accused, who then (prompted by her legal adviser), , made a statement to the effect that Mra. Mouat told her to fetch the things for her, and then gave theorto her, (accused) as presents. She had worked' for- -Vita. &ld¥at front the end of July, and had iidt received' any wages. Mra. Mouat owed her ;£7 for wages, and j £2. 18s for wprk and. other articles', ; aud Mr. Mouat owed her mother 153. for washing. , ( S^ , thought the thing? | were given to, her iris ea<t of payment. She was in a position to bring several witneses, who saw 'her take" the' goods Mrs. Mouat's' house, and afterwards take them away after 'they had [ been given to her by. Mrs,, Mouat, j Mr. Copland called Mrs. White, and Mrs. Drew^ whose evidence had no bearing upon ihe case. He also called two little girls,' Eliza Driscoll j sister of 'the accused, and- -Bridget -Peters; who' were examined without -beings sworn. ■'■ They stated that bhe: accused <me day wentinto Mrs. Mojiat'a, and brought out a box containing tw.> innffs, a white one and a brown one. They identified the muffs and the box as the one they saw. Accused gave one of the muffs to her sister, and kept the other. The resident Magistrate said that' the Bench was of opinion that there was a case to send to a jury. On no account however, would they send such a young child to gaol, and therefore, they would accept very small bail, Accused would

be comniitted to take her tnar af. the next Crimin.il Sessions of the Supreme Court, to be held in Lawrence. Bail in two sureties of £10 each, on the first charge ; two sureties cf £30 each on the second charge, and two- sureties of £5 each >n the third charge would be accepted. 1 The Court' then adjourned. s Feidat, November 8. 'Befora Vincent Pyka'Esq., R.M., an A J. F. Herbert Esq., J.P.) r Mr. Copland, at the opening of the Court, said that while leaving the Court the previous evening h« had been attacked. He weuld not be intimidated, and he u'uve warning that for his personal protection he would carry firearms. The Bench said Mr. Copland need be under no apprehension. The Bench would rotect him. Inspector Thompson said . if Mr Copland wished it, he would give him protection as far as the law allowed Timothy Driscoll and Catherine Driscoll were charged with receiving stolen goods. Inspector Thompson prosecuted ; and Mr. Copland appeared on behalf of iccused. Constable Tltchener was called, and repeated the evideuce he had given the previous day in the case of Julia Driscoll. The R.M. said that there wa3 no evidence whatever pointing to guilty knowledge on the part of the mother, and the father seemed ignorant of the whole affair. Mra. Driscoll evidently believed the things were given to her child by Mrs. Mouat. lie must say. however, that •my parents who allowed their children to bring home articles without making inquiry as to how they were obtained neglected their duty as parents and citizens. It was Mrs.' DriscolPa duty to have gone to Mra. Mouat and made inquiries relative to the things her child had drought home. She had had a narrow escape of being sent before a jury ; and if- she had only done her duty, her daughter would not then have been in the painful position of being committed for trial. Accused were then discharged.