MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 250, 25 November 1914, Page 8

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Mr T. A. B. Bailey, S.M.) DRINK.

A female first offender, for having been drunk in Oxford Terrace was convicted and discharged. Edward Bennett, 64 years of .age, for having been drunk in Hereford Street, an offence which constituted a breach of his prohibition order, was fined 40/-, in default 48 hours' imprisonment, on each charge. Bennett submitted that he was subject to giddiness and fell into the river. BREACH OF BY-LAW. Grenville Archei', for having left a motor cycle and side chair without lights, was fined 5/- and costs. FALSE PRETENCES. John Herbert Porter pleaded not guilty , when charged that between August 12 and September 11 he obtained a quantity of tobacco from the N.Z. Fanners' Co-op. Association, valued at £1 14/6, by a false pretence, stating that Mrs Thompson, of Southampton Street, had sent, him for it. Mr 11. Hanna appeared for the accused.

Ida Foster, an employee of the Co-op. Association, said that accused had on several occasions bought tobacco. He had given her to understand that his name was Mr Thompson, and that the account was to be sent to Mrs Thompson, of Southampton Street. Jane Emily Thompson said that Porter was her son-in-law. He had no right whatever to get the tobacco in her name.

To Mr Hanna: Porter and his wife had lived with her for some time off and on. She was a shareholder of the Farmers' Co-op. Association, and the more purchases she made the bigger were the bonuses she received from the association. Porter had on several occasions got goods on her authority. For tho defence, Mr Hanha submitted that the police had made out no case in view of the course of dealing carried on by Mrs Thompson, which showed that accused had been in the, habit of getting goods from the Farmers' Co-op. Accused, in evidence, denied having represented himself as Thompson. He had on several occasions told the Coop. j>eople that his name was Porter. He and his wife had been living for some years with Mrs Thompson. His wife and her mother did not get on -very well together, but he couldn't understand why the trouble, had arisen. It had been his practice to buy goods from the Co-op. on Mrs Thompson's authority.

To the Chief Detective: He might have sold some of the tobacco, but he smoked the greater portion of it, and gave away some. The Chief Detective said' that the accused came under the term of a drunken waster, but perhaps if a prohibition order-was issued against him and he was ordered to pay the money back, he thought the case would be met. ' Accused was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence whev called upon, while a prohibition, order was issued against him, and he was ordered to. refund the money within a month. Kenneth Armstrong,' 22 years of age, was charged that on September 29 he obtained a suit of clothes, a felt hat, and a necktie, valued at £5 10/-, from Henry Berry anil Co. by means of a false pretence, with intend to defraud. Mr Rowe. appeared for the/accused, who pleaded not guiMJy. - Wm. O. Rutherford, farmer, said he knew the accused, who had in his employ from May 18 to August 7. Witnes knew nothing of, the suit jpf qlothes accused :/ liad bouglvt; #iAii vM cfcauffeur to witness, as he did not keep a car. v Witness did not ring up. Berry and Co. with regard to the suit. H. Berry, of the firm of Berry and Co., tailors, explained that accused got the suit by representing that he was a chauffeur in the employ of Mr W. O. Rutherford, of Montrose. He wanted the suit for his sister's wedding, and Mr ..Rutherford, would see that it was paid for. Witness had known a birotli'er of the accused, but he did not know the accused himself, and would not have let him have the suit, except for his representations with .regard to Mr Rutherford. He-had explained the car minutely, and mentioned what a good ! driver he was.

Detective-Sergeant Hunt said that ac- j cused left for the Pitt Islands, Chatliams, the. day he got the clothes. He was arrested on arrival. For the defence, Mr Rowe said that the-accused did not remember stating that he was chauffeur to Mr Rutherford, although he would not swear that he did not do so. He had money in his possession at the time, and his sister did get married on the 27th. On that afternoon lie heard that the Himitangi was leaving, and in the hurry of the wedding and his departure lie had no means of sending.tlie money. He- was willing that an order should be made for payment of the amount. Mr Bailey remembered that the accused had been before him four times for similar offences. They seemed to be his special failing. He was convicted and sentenced to two years' aeformative treatment. UAIAPOI CASES. Reserved judgment was given in the cases Police v. Joseph Lister and his daughter, N. Lister, for whom Mr, Cassidy appeared. Mr' Bailey said that Joseph Lister, licensee of the Mandeville Hotel at Kaiapoi, was charged with selling liquor to a person apparently under the age of 21. The facts were that the liquor was supplied by a daughter of the defendant, who was helping her mother, who was then in charge of the bar. The defendant himself was not actually serving in the bar, nor had he given over charge of the bar to his daughter, and before he could be convicted it would have to be proved that he had some knowledge of the offence having been committed, or that he had delegated his authority to the person who supplied the liquor, not merely that the person was acting as his servant. The licensee should not be convicted unless there was knowledge or connivance on his part. The information was dismissed. In the case against the daughter a fine of £3 was imposed. -

Yorksliiremen will be interested in the following: —After the Mayor of Oamaru and Mr Snawden had complimented each other upon being Yorksliiremen recently (says the Oamaru "Mail") the latter explained the origin of Yorksliiremen. When James VI. of Scotland became James I. of England, and went to London, he took with him from Edinburgh 10,000 Scotsmen. As time wore on their footgear, known by the name, now to Englishmen, of brogues, began to wear out, and a messago was sent to Edinburgh for 10,000 pair of brogues. The scribe, however, omitted the letter "b," and left a wrod then popularly much used of Scotchmen. Ten thousand "rogues" were found in Edinburgh, and were marched away to London. They reached the site of the City of York before the mistake was discovered, and as London did not want them and Edinburgh refused to take them back, there [they remained, and their descendants 'to-day are true Yorksliiremen.