MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 65, 10 December 1907, Page 7

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

POLICE CASES. (Before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) ASSAULTING A WOMAN. A middle-aged man, named Michael Dβlaney pleaded "Guilty" to a charge of having assaulted Jane Hodgotts. Mr. Moran, for the defunco, stated that accused was a widower, and his daughter was at service in a cortain boarding-house. Defendant was notprepared to let tho girl remain there, and went to tho honso to take his daughter away, when complainant approached him armed with a coal-shovel, and he pushed her away. Dofondnnt was a hard-working man, and had only been in the Dominion about eight months. Counsel pleaded for leniency, and asked that accused should bo convicted and ordered to come up for sentenco when called upon. His Worship considered that the circumstances of the case wero somewhat peculiar, and no doubt defendant had some provocation for the way he had acted. Ho apparently wished to get his daughter away, hut ho had not proceeded about doing jt 1 in the proper away. Ho would lie convicted and fined. 405., and costs Gs., in dofault seven days' iinprisonmont.

ALLEGED THEFT OF SUGAR. James Brothorston, remanded from last week, was charged with the theft of a Sb'lb. bag of sugar, valued at 11s. (id;, tho property of A. fci, Paterson and Co. ■ Defendant, who was represented by Mr. Wilford, pleaded "Not Guilty." . ■ . Claude Woo'dford, foreman in Messrs. A. S. Paterson and Co.'s store, stated that accused was a driver for Mr. J. Collio, who had the contract for carting for the firm. No sugar had over boon missed from tho storo, but tho firm had hud short delivery from the wharf, and had consequently claimed on' tho shipping company. Witness did not think a carter could get an extra bag on his cart at the store. . • To Mr. Wilford: Tho bag in question could not bo identified as belonging to A. S. Patorsun and Co.

liobort D. Iveily, shipping clerk for. A. S. Paterson and Go.,' deposed that there had l>ooll , several small, shortages of late, l'lio ■.rxplana'lion was gcnoraliy that the sugar irus onTuiiried in t.he steamers. Charles Edward Cutts, restaurant keeper, liigest're Street, deposec] that hodid business with accused about three months ago. Accusod wont to witness' shop and dropped a bag of nugar there.' Accused came back in four or five days' time and asked for Gs. for tho Sugar. Witness threatened to toll tho firm's traveller, but on defendant pleading that nothing should he said about it, as he had a wifo and family dependent on him, witness decided to let tho. matter drop. About/ November 26 accused came to witness's place with a sack of (lour, but witness would have nothing to do with it, and subsequently informed the firm's traveller. Marion Cutts, wifo of tho previous witness, deposed that accused was at her husband's restaurant on November 20, when ho offered .a hag of flour for sale. Accused had been at tho place previously and had left a bag of sugar. He returned fivo days after leaving the sugar and was paid for it. Witness had since returned tho sugar to tho firm. Dotectivo Williams stated that on Novomber 30 he saw. tho accused, who denied having sold sugar to Cutts at any timo. James Gardiner, a driver for Mr. Collio, statod that last Saturday week two dotcc•tives met him and asked if ho knew anything about a bag of sugar sold to Cutts. Olio of tho detectives said ho had*reliable information that witness had sold a hag of sugar to Cutts. Witness denied tho charge, and asked to be taken beforo the man to whom tho sugar was alleged to have been sold.

James Brothorston doposed that ho had never left a bag of sugar at Cutts's. When he .loaded sugar there were several men to chock the bags as they were put on. He had never pleaded with Mr, or Mrs'. Cutts for tho sako of his wife and family. In fact, ho had no wifo or family. Witness was positive Mr. and Mrs. Cutts had inado a mistake, in identifying him. _ ' His Worship said the whole question turned on the identification of the individual. Mr. and Mrs. Cutts swore that accused was the man who came to their place, and accused denied that ho was thero. One of tho witnesses had sworn that on returning the second timo for tho money accused had pleaded on behalf of his wifo and children, but accused said ho had noithor wifo or child. The case was suspicious, but tho Court was not satisfied as to identification. There was a doubt, and accused must have tho benefit of it. Tho informatio nwould bo dismissed. .

YOUNG HOUSE-BUILDER IN TROUBLE ; A young man, named Robert Stcokbridgo, remanded from . last week, answered two charges, the first of receiving a quantity of wall paper, valued at £4 Is., the proporty of Jiiinos Trevor, knowing tho saiuo to havo been dishonestly obtained, and tho second of tho theft of two posts, valued at os., tho property of William Forkjns. . Pleas of " Guilty" were ontered in each case. ,j\lr: Wilford, who appeared for tho defence, asked for lonioncy, winch, if granted, ho'assured tho Court, would not. bo abused. Tbo posts wero found in tho public roadway,, nnd wore a temptation to a young man who was building a house. It was admitted that thepaper had been purchased by defendant for 155., and ho would frankly admit that it must havo been dishonestly obtained to bo oit'ored him at that figure. Counsel read a batch of twolvo lotters testifying to tho previous good character of defendant.'. His Worship said ho was prepared to give dofendant another chance. The future was in his own hands, and he must make tho most of tho chance. Ho would bo convicted nnd ordered to come up for sentence when called upon, and bo ordered to refund tho valuo of tho goods. MAINTENANCE. Oliver Mowliinney appeared on a charge of failing to provido for the support of his wife.. Mr. Wilford appoaral for tho defence!, but complainant was not represented by bounsol, in spite of advice from the Court to got a solicitor. After hearing tho. evidence, and considerable argument, His Worship dismissed tho information. . Ch.irlos Enticott was charged with disobeying an order for tho maintenance, of his

wifo. Defendant was convicted, and sentenced to ono month's imprisonment, tlw warrant to bo suspended if" the amount of arrears, .C 8 55., is paid licforo December lfi. Mr. Hiiore appeared for complainant. MISCELLANEOUS. Tlio Registrar of JJirths proceeded against Floronco Jβ. Curran, Gertrude .I'. Downes, David P. Fisher, and Edwin A. Philps for failing to register the birth of thoir children. In each caso a fino of 55., and costs 75., was inflicted. On the wife's application, a prohibition order was issued against George- Samuel Hadfiold.who was-also mulcted-in costs £1 Is. On the application of Mr.. M'Grath, for the defence, leiivo to ap]>oal was granted, .county being fixed at\£]o 10s. Mr. Stout appeared for complainant. Kate Malthy was granted a separation from her husband, Charles 15. It. Maltby, defendant being ordered to pay the sum of 30s. per week towards his wife's maintenance, and costs £2 lls. Mr. Hislop appeared for complainant.