THE COURTS-TO-DAY. MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 10149, 30 October 1896, Page 2

THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Mr E. H. Carew, S.M.)

G. Border snd Co. v. William H. Noel.— Claim, £2O 15s, on a judgment summons. Mr Solomon for the plaintiffs. —Defendant, examined, said that during the last eighteen months he had been making a living by following up race meetings. He could not say how much .he had earned ; lie had kept no note of his e rnhigs —Mr Solomon applied for an adjournment until the 13th "November, to enable him to call other evidence to prove the amount of defendant's earnings.— The adjournment was granted. B. Solomon v. Martin Macdo'nald (Waikftia). —Claim, £2 0s 6d, for goods supplied.—Mr F. Z. Moore for plaintiff, for whohi judgment was given by default. D. Beujamiti anil Co. v. Alfred Garry (Waipawa}.- Claim, £9 5s 9d, for goods supplied. —Alter evidence had been given for tho plaintin's, judgmeat was entered up for the amount claimed.

C. Wilkie v. James B. M'Kenzie (Mosgicl).— Claim, £l4 16s M, for goods supplied. Mr Finch for plaintiff.—Judgment was given for the plaintiff for the amount claimed. Greig, Willcocks, and Co. v. George Lynn.— Claim, £5 10j 7d, for goods supplied. Mr C. M. Mo at for the plaintiffs.—Judgment was given for the plaintiffs for the sum claimed. Croxford and Sons v. Probasco and Finlay.— Claim, £9 ss, for goods supplied. Mr Gallaway for plaintiffs, Mr Solomon for defendants.— Evidence was heard on both sides.—His Worship gave judgment for the plaintiffs for the amount ettimed. CttY POLICE COURT. (Before Messrs G. L. Denniston and R. Wilson, J.r.s) Au.koki-1 Pkb.ti'ky.— Lottie Power, a young girl, was charged with committing peijury at Ditnedin on the 7th inst. by swearing in the Magistrate's Court that she was a married woman.—Mr Barclay appeared for the prosecution, and asked for a remand for a week.—Remanded accordingly, bail being allowed accused in her own recognisance of £IOO, and two sureties of £SO each. Vaoban'cy.— Thomas Myall pleaded guilty to this offence, and was sentenced to three months' imprisonment. I.aiicksy AH A Baii.F.R.— Harry Augustus tfi'ott was charged with, ou or about the 2ith inst., the attempted theft of one gelding," the property of Thomas Dwyer. Mr Hanlon defended. Detective M'Grath stated that the accused, who was an insurance canvasser, hired the horse in question from Mr Dwyer, a liverv stable-keeper at Lawrence, at the rate of 7s 6d a day. The defendant told Dwyer that he was going to Miller's Flat, but instead of going to that place he rode into Dunedin, and offered the horse for sale to several persons. He s-aid that the animal cost him £2O, and that he was soiling because his wife was dying. He (Detective M'Grath) arrested tho accused at Mo-giel with horse, saddle, and bridle in his possession.— Evidence was given by Thomas Dwyer, Joseph Olliver, Hugh Gourley, James Wilson, Jamc3 Jeffs, anil Detective M'Grath.—Mr Hanlon said that the defendant and the prosecutor had a conversation about the sale of the horse, and the defendant thought that if he could fell the animal at a profit there would be an end of it. '1 he defendant had committed a foolish act, but he (counsel) submitted that his action in trying to sell tho horse at all the livery stables in Dunedin was not that of a thief.— Mr Denniston r-ai'l that the Bench were not patisfied that there bad been a felonious intent, and decided to give accused the benefit of the doubt. The case was therefore dismissed.

AYovruvi-hOi'yysDKK.—J'jhnJ'oli/ltn-c, aged thirteen years, was charged with theft, on the 28th October, of cue watch, valued at £2 10s, the property of Andrew Andrews.—Mr Solomon appeared for the boy, who pleaded not guilty.— Detective M'Grath said the facts were as follow :—A gii 1 named Margaret Andrew and her brother, aged eleven yea r s, came to town on the date in questh n. She had with her a watch which belonged to an elder brother, and which she had brought with her to get repaired. She handed it to her younger brother, and asked him to remain in Mr M'Ncill'a thop iu Maclaggan street while she went down town on business. During her absence the boy left the shop and made his way to the Arcade, wdiere he met accused. They had a conversation together, the result of which was that the boy Andrews handed the watch to accused. Polglase then gave Andrews a penny with which to buy some lollies, and when the latter returned to him for his watch accused said " I gave it to you." The matter was reported to the police, and accused admitted to Constable Coonev that he had the watch, and took him to the place where he had it concealed. —After a consultation with the lad's father Mr Solomon said that he had agreed with Mr Polglase that he should withdraw the plea of not guilty and plead guilty.— Mr Denniston said that accused had committed a very impudent theft and deserved punishment. Tho Bench wore vnwilling to brand the boy's life with a conviction, and they would adjourn the case till vV'ednes'ay on the understanding that the father gave him a sound whipping in the presence of a constable —Mr Polglaso said he would do that, and the case was adjourned accordingly. - (Before Messrs P, G. Pryde and N. Skv> wright, J.P.s )

Aii'.Hiißn TiiKin'.— Harry Augustus Scott was further charged with converting to his own use a watch valued at £5, the propoi ty of Jamos Dawson and another. Mr Hanlon defended.— Detective M'Grath stated that the complainant wan a jeweller carrying on business in Dunedin. Kin agent (Mr Perry) dhpoßed of a watch to accused on what was known as the hire Bystom. Scott was to pay a deposit of lQfl and £1 a month. Mr Perry explained to him that th-i watoh was to remain the property of Mr Dawson until the whole amount was paid. Accused ptid the 10s and nothing else, and on the 25th of September he pledged the watch at Mrs Isaacs b pawn office.—Evidence was given by James Arthur O. Perry, and James Dawson (who, in answer to Mr Hanlon, said that he understood that the watch was fold on the timepayment system, which meant that so much of the purchase money was deposited and the ba'ance was to be paid by instalments). Sir Hanlon further examined the witness to show that accused bought the watch on terms, and therefore was not the bailee of the watch. It was his own property.— At this stage of the proceedings Mr Pryde eaid that the Bench had come to the conclusion that the case should be dismissed.—Detective M'Grath eaid that the prosecutor wanted to know if he was to get his watch back.—Mr Hanlon: No ; the watch belongs to us. It must be handed back to the man it belongs to. Mr Dawson has a civil remedy. Unless there is a conviction the Bench have no po vcr to deal with the matter.—The Court then rose.