POLICE COURT —Wednesday.d [Before Thomas Beckham, Esq. R.M ]

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXIV, Issue 3510, 15 October 1868, Page 4

POLICE COURT —Wednesday.d [Before Thomas Beckham, Esq. R.M ]

-Dbpnkknnbss. — Alice Hoakins aud Joseph Cowie ! were each fined ss. and the costs for th s offence. Obscene LAtiauxaa — Elizabeth Smyth pleaded guilty to using obscene language in Queen-street. — The Commissioner of Police said this was the fourth time the woman had been charged with a similar offence. On the last occasion she had received iwo months' imprisonment. — His Worship : Is she a married iroman? — 1 ho Commissioner : I don't know, but.l should think not, your Worship. — The Clerk said the prisoner had been brought up and fined £10, or sentenced to two months' imprisonment with, hard labour, on the 4th of August. — His Worship said as the imprisonment seemed to have produced 1 so little effect, it was not at all improbable that the woman might be brought up, and ordered to find sureties— aud who would find sureties for euch an incorrigible character ? — and if the sureties were nob paid one would certainly be sentenced to a long term of imprisonment. Ue would order her to pay a fine of £10 and the costs, or in defaulb to be i impriaoned for two months ; and after that, if she did not discontinue the uaa of obscene language, another course might be adopted that would have the effect of deterring her friends from paying the fine imposed upon her, — Prisoner said she could not pay the fine. — His Worship ordered her to be imprisoned for two months, with hard labour. Larbknt — William Bushe pleaded not guilty to having stolen from the Karaka, Shortland, three blankebs and two pair of boots, the property of Daniel Packer. — D*&iel Packer deposed that prisoner resided in 'the same whare with himself. On the 4th October, he and the prisoner slept in the whare, which is situate at the J£araka. On the Monday, miised three blankets, value 305., after knocking-off work. Prisoner had left the house. Also missed two pair of value 30s. Repotted the robbery to the police. Saw thej blanket and boots again at the police-station on Tuesday night. (Boots aud blankets produced.) Could identify the boots and blankets produced as the i&me.- Detective Murphy dep >sed that he was in company with the prosecutor at 10 o'clock on Tues day night. Saw prisouer go into the Exchange Hotel. Followed him ; prosecutor remaining outside. Saw that prisoner had a pair of boots answering the description prosecutor had given. Brought prisoner outside, and prosecutor identified the boott. Arrested prisoner, and brought him to tha police station. Found prisoner'^ swag at the Exohaage, whioh consisted of three pair of blankets k and the pair of boots now produced. — Prisoner in defence made a statement to the effect that prosecutor had lent him the blankets and boots. — Prosecutor, recalled, deposed) that he did not give the blankets to the prisoner. He lent him the blankets. — His Worship taid ther9 did not appear to have been any intention on the part of the prosecutor to allow the prisoner "to stick to the boots aud blankets" as he termed ifc. Prisoner had said a good deal as to the difficulty of procuring " tucker," but it certainly was not a good way of procuring it to st-al a neighbour's goods. It was clear tnat the prisoner had endeavoured to clear the house out, aud that he bad had gone away without giving any notice to prosecutor. It was clear that the things were not lent or given to the prisoner,because prosecutor at once went and laid an information when he found that prisoner took away the things. — Prisoner said prosecutor knew he w«s leaving. — Prosecutor said prisoner had left promising to return, but did not do ao. — His Worship found the prisoner guilty, and sentenced him to four months' imprisonment with hard labour. Breach of Merchant Shipping act. John Henry pleaded not guilty to a breach of the above Act by abseuting himself from the barque * Leonidas' on the 4th October. — Mr. Hesketb appeared for the prosecution. — Prisoner said he had only gone ashore For half an hour in order to procure coffeP, as there was no coal on board the vessel. — His Worship said the prisoner had no right; to leave the phip. He was doubtless well paid for his woik, and every moment, of hi« tim ) belonged to the ship. Prisoner^ind others' must be taught that he had no right to leave the, vessel without permission. He was Halle to four , weeks with hard labour.— The captain said he hadi no desire to press the charge, but merely to make' an example. — Prisoner : Is a man obliged to ask always for leave to go ashore when the ship is lying along -id c the wharf ? —His Worship:, I shall order you to be imprisoned for 48 hours, with hard labour, and that will teach you and others that while you are on board ship you must ask for everything. Take him away. Thomas Carr pleaded' guilty to a similar offence. Ihe captain said he had not had occasion previously to fiud fault with the man. He would be quite willing to take the man back again. — His Worship severely cautioned the prisoner, and ordered him to be put on board ship. Forgbby AND Uttering. — Thomas P. Henly was brought up charged by Dennis Markham with uttering a forged cheque to the amount of £38 155., purporting to be drawn by W. H. Foot. — The Commissioner of Police said he would nob be able to prove the forgery of the signature by the evidence of the rerson whose handwr'tng ib pur-, ported to be ; but he could prove by conclusive evidence that the signature was not that of W. H. Foot. Mr. James, of the Q.0.E., had kept a list of those people who came to his house to lodge, ani could thus prove the signature. — His Worship said Mr. James had acted very wisely in keeping such a book, and it was a pity that other publicans did not follow his example. — Dennis Markham proprietor of the Naval and Family Hotel, deposed that on Saturday, October 3, prisoner came to the hotel, and said he would stop for a week as a lodger. Prisoner had dinner and tea, after which he gave witness a cheque, which he now produce, made payable by the Bank of Austra'asia, for £38 155., and purporting to be drawn by W. H. Foot in favour of prisont-r. Asked witness to give him £2 until Monday, as he was late for the Bank. It was about 7 o'clock at mght. Prisoner said he had slept in bhe same room with Foot at the Q.U.JD. Knew Mr. Foot well, but could not bay if that was the person whose name appeared at the foot of the cheque. Prisoner said the cheque was payment for a claim at the Thames. On Monday morning prisoner asked for the cheque that he might get it cached. Witness said he was going down the town, and if the prisoner liked he could go with him, or if he did not choose to do that he c >uld meet witness at the Bank. Prisoner said he would let witness have bis money in a few minutes. He then, went away, but did not return. Did not see him until Wednesday, the 7 th, when he was arrested. Went to the Bank abunc an hour after prisoner left • was told there were " no funds." Gave the cheque to Detective Murphy. — Cross-examined by Mr. Hest-th: Never saw Foot write. Could not say whether or not that was hiji signature.- Louis Rose James, pr. prietor of th? Q.C.8., 'Victoria-street, deposed .that on the 16bh September prisoner came to his house, and signed his name in a book kept for visitors. (B >ok pro duced.) Foot came on the 24th I s eptembsr and also signed his name in the book. Prisoner and he were in the same room together. 2?aw them both write their signatures. Had seen Foot write his signature to cheques before, wh>-n he was staying at the house. Was well acquainted with his signature. , The signature to the cheque produced wax not Foot's liguature. . — His Worship : It is commenced with a huihll " f. " It is a small loot. — Examination continued : The " H " in the signature of Foot and the rt«me Tbos P, Henly ace the same as are entered by Henly in my books. I ihould certainly say it was Henly 'a writing. It is not the writiug of the Mr. Foot that stayed at my ho me, aud $>lept in the same room with the prisoner. — Cross-examined by Mr. Hesketli : i t.ke upou myself to swear that it is not the writing of the Foot th it stayed at my bouse. The siguature of the name Henly is very fair writing. The •i^nature Heuly is the same as th>tt ■ signed by Henly in the visitors' book. > Cannot . swear that signature was nob feigned by -Foob, but would swear that it was not his signature.' — By the Bench : That is not Food's signature. — William Corbett, ledger-keeper at the Bankroll Australasia, deposed to the presentation of the cheque. t Took the , signature to be Mr. H. Foot. , Did not cash the cheque, because Mr. H. Foot had no account there, nor had W. H. Foot, flefuseoV.bn cash the cheque ; returned it with "noacount." — James Murphy, detective, deposed to the apprehension of ihe v prisoner on the 11th Ocbober in Queen-street. When prisoner was arrested he gave. his name as Thomas P. Henly. Had seen him write his name. Ho wrote it to the property-sheet kept in the police office, which all prisoners charged with indictable offences have to do. Had also seen his name in Mr. James's visitors' book. Believed the handwriting in the body of the cheque to be the prisoner's. Did not know Foot or his writing. Had made all inquiry, and could not find W. H v Foot in the province. Believed ther,e was a man named James Foot ab the Thames. Cautioned the prisoner in the usual manner, and he said he did not know who W. H. Foot was ; that he put any name to it. Witness then had the cheque in his hand. James Foot was - at the Thames ; but the police had siuce received information that he bad gone to Napier. Do not know where he is. — The evidence having been read over to the prisoner, and the usual caution having been jireD, Mr. Henkethsaid after thatevidebcftitwould be

useli B8 to offer auy remarks. He would therefor* reserve his defence until ttie prisoner was brought to triil before a jury of bia countrymen. — His Worship said he felt it to be his i duty to, caution the publio against taking cheques without making due inquiry, or unless they r re thoroughly well acquainted with thepiriy There 'would be very much le.s crime if proper caution were observed, and people in-Auck-land werfl too, facile in giving tjoodsi on pijedit to perspns whom the'y, did, not fc.ufficie.utly know, an,d in taking ch»-,qiie fB,without f 8, without due iuctuiry. There was no ! ft.t^rnHtive bijt.to commit the prisoner for c trial after such evidence as 1 hud been adduced. <The Court then rose. ' i