THE CHARGE AGAINST OSBORNE.

A PECULIAR DEVELOPMENT

Constable Oln-r Harry Osborne was en Fi iday morning cliarsj^d. before Mr C. C (liaham, S.M.. at the City Police Court, with having, about the 9th March, stolen fi^e packets of en\ elopes and two packets of note-paper, valued at 3^ 9d. tho property ot James Wallace. Mr J. F. M. Frascv appeared to conduct tlie prosecution and Mr Solomon api^oarcd on behalf of accused, who pleaded "Not gx.ilty." Mr Fra*er. renKiuo 1o h Worship, said tho offence v\a.s to be treated a, an indict' able one. Mr Solomon: Hoii is that? His Worship chew attention to the f«cb that the t'naig.> wa; one ot ha\iiiti -.olen. envelopes and note paper. Mr Frascr: Theft <r O m a dwelling— fioca a shep.

His Worship : The charge does not say so.

Mr Solomon said that this point would have' to be disposed of before they went on with the case.

His Worship read an information just sworn by Detective Herbert, and charged acc\ised with having stolen from the shop of James Wallace.

Mr Solomon asked if there was not another information before the court, to vhich his" Worship replied there was — the one first read. Mr Solomon : Well, what do you propose to do with that? Mr Fraser : I propose to charge the

prisoner with breaking and entering. Mr Solomon : I cannot go on with it, then. I came here to defend a case of larceny ; not one of burglary. Surely the police should know by now whether they are going to charge the accused with larceny or burglary. Surely they know what the offence is. If this man is guilty of burglary, then it is a most improper thing to charge him with larceny, and if he is guilty of larceny, then it is a most improper thing to charge him with burglary- I* seems to me that the charge has been shifted about simply to prevent your Worship dealing with it. What offence do the police Eay this man has committed — burglary or laiceny? Mr Fraser: He is charged with breaking tad entering. Mr Solomon : You proposed' to go on with this case of larceny. It was only ■when "you found that he could be dealt with, by the magistrate summarily that you altered it. "The Magistrate: The qixestion -is, How am I to deal with the case? The case before me is the amended one. If you are not prepared to go on you must ask for an adjournment. Mr Solomon : But it is the other case that is before you. The Magistrate : They have asked leave fco amend it. Mr -Solomon : They cannot amend it. However, I-lhink I can get over the difiii;ultv.* There is an information before the

court. It is assumed that the case must .be dealt witb summarily. That is not the case at all. TKere is no reason why we

should not go on -with the larceny case. There is no reason why a man charged with such an offence should not be 6ent up for trial. Mr Fraser said he proposed to go on with the charge of breaking and entering. Mr Solomon: What is going to be done irith the first information? Mr Fraser eaid he would not offer any evidence on the first charge. Mr Solomon : Very well ; the accused is charged with larceny^ he "pleads " Not guilty " ; the Crown offers no evidence ; the case must be dismissed. v > His Worship, after a pause, accepted Mr Solomon's reasoning, and the charge was " dismissed, and then followed some peculiar proceedings. Mr Solomon (turning to the accused): You can go. Mr Eraser: He can't gov

Mr Solomon: Go. / Accused thereupon got itp and 1 walked round the table, with the apparent intention of leaving the court, but was met by Detective Herbert, who stopped him. Mr Solomon: You cannot arrest him here. It is contempt, of court. Accused walked, back to where his counsel was, and was again told by him to go. Accused then left the court by the^jjublic exit, the detective following him. ATew moments afterwards he was brought back, having apparently been arrested on reaching! the outside of the building.

His- Worship intimated that there was

mo case before the court. Mr Solomon: What are you going to do with this (meaning the second information put in ' by Detective Herbert) ? It is not the one you "are goipg to proceed with. A third information was here prepared and put in, charging Osborne with having, in December last, broken and entered the shop of Mark Moore Kilroy and stolen "therefrom seven silk handkerchiefs, valued at £1 6s 3d. Before this information was laid before the court in the usual way, the acting-clerk extracted from the mass of informations about his desk one which apparently dealt with theft* from a shop, tut the information charging Osborne with breaking and entering was finally read. Mr Solomon said he was not prepared to go on with it, and asked for a remand, ■which -was eventually granted for one week. Mr Fraser said that if they waited a qua'rteii. of an hour any other informations which it was proposed to lay would be put in. Mr Solomon said he could not agree to that. The charges could be laid in the usual way. He asked for bail, which was granted—accused in £200 and two sureties of £100 each. A pause ensued after the bail had been fixed, at the "end of which his Worship asked if there was £oing to be any further ■' Mr Fraser : No ; other charges will be laid, and due notice will be given to Mr Solomon. The court then rose.