Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

CITY POLICE COURT.

(Before Messrs D. Brent and W. Dawson,

Justices.)

Dui'NKKNNESS.—Two first offenders woro convicted and discharged; John Gilleson (twenty previous convictions) was fined 20s, in default forty-eight hours' imprisonment. Stealing Uahbitskins. — Thomas Cross, Ernest Lewis, and William Dickson, each between thirteen and fourteen years of age, were charged with stealing a quantity of rabbitskins, value L 6 3s 3d, the property of Arthur M'Donald and Co. The parents desired that the cases should be dealt with summarily. Each of the boys pleaded guilty.—Detective Henderson said that the facts of the case were that Lewis and Cross had been employed at M'Donald and Co. 's wool store, from which skins had been missed for the last two months. It appeared that theso two boys had been packing up the skins into bundles and throwing them out of the window for Dickson to receive and sell. Yesterday they weredfitected in this sort of thing, and whon arrested pleaded guilty.—Lewis's father said that his boy had only worked at the store for a. fortnight.—Detective Henderson remarked that tho parents wore respectable people, and tho boys had not been previously beforo the Court. Mrs Crow was u widow, Mr* Dickson was earning her own living, and all the parents said that the boys had not given any trouble before.—The Bench would like to hear what the Probation Officer had to say.—Mr Phillips said that he had nothiug to say at present, but if the case were remanded he would make inquiries.—At the invitation of the Bench tho parents stepped forward in turn. Mrs Cross said that her boy had hitherto borne a good character ; Mr D. D. Macdonald (who had been asked to speak for Lewis) said that that boy had been but a fortnight at work at the store, and that if the Bench let him off the father would undertake to chastise him j and Mrs Dickson stated that her boy hud previously bohaved himself properly.— Mr Arthur M'Douald elated that he did not wish to press the charge, _ but at the eaine time he might mention that he

had traced over LSO worth of stolen 81111? lately, and, as this sort of crime was on the increase, he would recommend that the boys be striped. The. Bench (addressing the boys): The punishment for the offence with whioh you aro charged is imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or a fine of LlO, and in addition the Bench have power to order twelve strokea with ft biroh rod. Tlie Bench are, however, unwilling to imprison such children as you are, and aro willing, in consequence of the good character given you, to afford you another chance. They wil! not dismiss the case finally, but give you another chance. You will be convicted and ordered to come up for sentence when called upon. We hope this will be a caution to you. If you do not behave yourselves you may yet be punished. Crukwy to a House. —John. Vincent pleaded not guilty to a charge of this nature, it being alleged that he worked the horse while it had an open sore under the harness, and also beat it on tho legs and ribs with a spreader.—Defendant said that he did not use a spreader. There was a bit of a sore, but it was getting well.—Evidence was given by Constable Parker and two other witnesses, after which .Sergeant Maedonnell said that defendant was a wellbehaved young man and the sole support of an invalid mother.— The Bench naiil they would deal leniently with the defendant in consequence of the good character given to him. lie would bo convicted and lined 10s and coats, in default three dayn' imprisonment. A reasonable time would ho allowed for payment of the line. It was agreed that a mouth's grace tihould be given.

MAGISTRATES COURT; PORT

CIIALMEIvX,

(Before K. H. Curew, Esq., R.M.)

William Elder v. Thomas Brown,—Claim, Lll ss, for four tanks and a quantity of whale line. Mr A. D. Adams for plaintiff; Mr Wilkinson for defendant.—After hearing the evidence of the plaintiff, who stated that the goods sued for were not included in the sale of the barque Splendid (which he sold to defendant on behalf of himself and Captain Earle, who was joint owner, but was now out of the colony), and the evidenco of Captain James Malcolm, who purchased the goods from plaintiff on behalf of the defendant, Mr Wilkinson asked for a nonsuit, on the ground that the property sued for was by the plaintiff's own evidence only partly his own, part belonging to Captain Earle, and there was nothing before the Court to show that plaintiff hod authority to sell.—Mr Aduins asked to have the plaint note amended, but after argumen His Worship nonsuited plaintiff, without costs.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18890629.2.13

Bibliographic details

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY., Evening Star, Issue 7946, 29 June 1889

Word Count
804

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY. Evening Star, Issue 7946, 29 June 1889

Working