POLICE COURT.—This Day.

Auckland Star, Volume V, Issue 1489, 18 November 1874, Page 3

POLICE COURT.—This Day.

(Before Thomas Beckham, Esq., R.M.)

TRAVELLERS TO EDEN. James Walker, Frederick Scott, and Daniel Hicketty were charged with drunkenness, and fined 10s each or forty-eight hours in Mount Eden.

MERELY A SQUIB. John Clarke was summoned to answer for a breach of the bye-laws, by lighting a squib at the corner of Grey and Wakefield-street on the sth instant.

John pleaded guilty. ........ «. Mr. Inspector Broham said that the offence was committed on the evening of the sth of November. , , His Worship said that defendant was liable to a fine of £5. The young lad said he was very sorry. He did not think there was harm in keeping up Guy Fawke's Day. His aunt asked the Court to be lement towards him. He was a very good lad, and had been quietly brought up in the bush. His Worship : How much pocket money does he get? His Aunt: Sixpence a week. Mr. Broham consented to withdraw the charge. The charge was therefore withdrawn, his aunt payiDg the costs, 6s. 6d., being thirteen weeks pocket money. ON THE WESN& SIDE. George Cook, omnibus proprietor, appeared in answer to a summons charging him with driving a 'bus at the corner of Symondsstreet and Karangahape Road, and hindering another vehicle driven by one James Gardener, from passing on the legitimate side of the road on the 12th inst. Mr. Joy appeared for the defendant, and pleaded not guilty.

Cotrt *S S T WaS Hkely t0 occuPy the Court some time* counsel consented to a remand until to-morrow. U3Batea ™ a

THE WAKEFIELD-STEET FIRE CASE. of S 1 i? 6mSi ey aPP? ared ag^ on the charge of wilfu ly and maliciously setting fire to premises m Wakeneld-strJet, ou the aSd

Mr Brookfield appeared for the prosecution Mr hroham ontiie part of the police. Mr Heskeih and Mr Meyer, solicitors for prisoner.

Mr Hesketh m addressing the Court said that he and his learned friend were prepared to meet this charge and would prefer making some remarks in this Court rather than in a higher Court, should the prisoner be committed. Mr Hesketh then referred to the suspicious circumstances oE the case, and he especially touched upon the mysterious old gentleman (o whom it was alleged the prisoner made some observation.

His Worship asked if that old gentleman was present.

_ Mr Hesketh replied that that venerable individual was invisible] to this Court. He stated further that it was said that the fire originated in the shed, and there was little doubt but the fire did originate in or near that spot, but it was for the prosecution to shew that the prisoner was implicated in the origin of the lire. That the fire originated in the shed depended entirely upon the evidence of Avery, who left his cottage about five o'clock, and soon after his return at eleven o'clock the fire broke out. Another small matter in reference to Avery's evidence should not be passed over, namely, the ringing of the bell by Avery, when another witness said that he did not hear the bell, but first observed the reflection of the fire, and hewas only fifty yards off. Here was an evident contradiction, and Avery was not at all clear aa to whether there was or was not a fire in the cottage on that night. He then touched upon the books which had been left with Mr. Woodward, which would seem to indicate that the fire was premeditated. Jdc thought if the books had not that meaning the Court might close its eyes to that fact altogether. It was done openly. There was no false representation about it, nor any thing unreasonable. It was a circumstance, but in looking at it reasonably it vanished altogether. It was unreasonable to suppose that prisoner would leave his books tnere had he intended to fire the premised. Mr. Hesketh then noticed in succession the various points in the evidence, and dwelt especially upon the basket of crockery, and considered that Smith was mistaken in his identification of the basket, and he could call evidence to shew that the basket referred to was taken out by Hasaell, the carrier, on the 2Sth, which was taken to Malarn's house, but, singularly enough, Malam had not been called to give evidence in this case, he then spoke of the cask and cases left in the Maiket, and submitted that they were not removed under surreptitious circumstances, but removed op-nly some time betore the fire for puip;js*s of business. Had prisoner intended to have burnt the premises he would surely not have been so inconsistent as to have entered tnosa goods in his stock book, and have shown the entries to Mrs Woodward.

His Worship remarked that, it seemed that Mrs Wood waul was somewhat uneasy about receiving the goods, and to satisfy her Kemsley shewed her the book with certain eutiiea in black and red, which nlie did not appear to have read, but which Kemsloy told her related to the goods, and that she need not be alarmed.

Mr Hesketh continued : It was singular that when Mra Woodward spoke to prisoner about the goods saved, that ke was able to give a clear mid eatlislattury answer, and if he could answer Mrd Woodward se coqclusively, he coiud answer tha Court in an equally satisfactorily manner upon those goods. We considered that Keiusley was light in enteiiag those goods iv lira book which he sent to the market, where he evidently intended to open a branch store. He regretted that the list of the goods did not bear a date ; but why should he do such a mad thing as to put the prices againßt the articles, if he had no idea of selling them in the market, and of ascertaining the profit they would Lear, which he understood was fifty per cent? Those goods wore not on ttie premises on the night of the lire, and by charging himself with them he gave the Insurance Companies credit for them, aud had acted fairly and frankly. He would prove distinctly to the Court that there was no intention to defraud, by putting Mr Meyers in the box, if necessary. Counsel then referred to the evidence «f Mr Adean, a witness who had busied himself in passing the ruin, i» making his estimate, but which was of no material importance. 'Ihen, according to old sayings, some were born with silver spoons in their mouths, while others were born under unlucky planets. The prisoner, therefore, might be termed unlucky in going to the Whau on that particular evening to fetch his wife and family, and it was unfair because a lire broke out on that night, that an imputation of so serious a nature should be made against the prisoner. He could bring abundant evidence to shew that Mrs. Kemsley was in a delicate state of health, and that the going to the Whau was not a fancy notion, but essential under the circumstances. With respect to the removal of the goods in the hogsnead to the Whau. fie was anxious to meet the Court fairly, which was the only circumstance which calls for a definite answer. He would on this head make one or two suggestions to the Court. It was stated that the cask contained lamp-shades, which it was proved the cask did not contain. He believed that prisoner did not inform Smith that they were lamp-shades, for the cask would certainly have baen opened, and the deception discovered. Mr. Hesketh proceeded to comment at length on other portions of the evidence, especially that of Smith and Harrison, the former of whom had told Mr. Meyer that he had be.en offered £100 to give evidence on the other side.

After a few remarks from the Bench on the suspicious circumstances of the case, the Court adjourned for half-aa-hour. On resuming, depositions having been read over, his Worship said that the cask was a great stumbling block in prisoner's way. The evidence of the Woodward family might have been perfectly correct, as he believed from the evidence that the cask .was put there after dark. Tiie chopped sl.raw and the matches, which the prisoner himself alluded to, was remarkable. Mr Hesketh said he should not, therefore, bring forward any evidence for the defence, which b.3 would reserve.

The Court exonerated Mr. Malam, of the Whau, and Mr. Woodward, of Auckland, from any connection with the late fire. The prisoner was ordered to be bound over himself in £600 and two surities in £300 each to appear at the next sitting of the Criminal Court to take hia trial upon the charge of arson.

This was all the business,