RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XV, Issue 860, 6 February 1861, Page 4

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Christchurch.—Tuesday, Jan. 29, 1861. (Before W. J. W. Hamilton, Esq., R.M.) BREACH OF SLAUGHTERHOUSE ORDINANCE. William Trask, of Market Place, Christchurch, butcher, appeared in answer to a summons upon an information laid against him, for slaughtering sheep on his premises, in the Market Place, without a license. He admitted the offence. The Resident Magistrate fined him £5, and costs 6s. 6d., stating that-he had no option in the matter, but as this was accused's first offence, he would recommend a mitigation of the penalty upon an application made to him within a fortnight. There were several cases of debt disposed of today, presenting nothing of interest. Wednesday, Jan. 30, 1861. (Before W. J. W. Hamilton, Esq., R.M.)

COMPOUND LARCENY.

Archibald Watson Brandon, of Rangiora, surrendered to his bail taken on a previous occasion, to answer to three charges of larceny, laid against him by his father, Captain John Rose Brandon, of Rangiora. The charges were for stealing a brooch, two bullocks, and a mare. Mr. Slater, Solicitor, appeared for Captain Brandon, and Mr. Williams for the accused.

Captain Brandon stated that since laying the information, he had found he was in error regarding the transactions; they had all happened with Mrs. Brandon's knowledge and consent during his absence, from the colony, and he now wished to withdraw the charges.

Miss Brandon was called and proved that her brother had received the brooch from his mother, and had returned it to her before the information was laid. She also proved that the mare was: sold by her mother's consent, and that another mare was received in exchange.

Mr. F. J. Elmer, of Rangiora, proved that the proceeds of the sale of the bullocks were handed to the accused, and tliat he signed a receipt for the .amount, as receiving it on Captain Brandon's account. He also proved that, Mrs. Brandon knew of the sale of the bullocks.

■ .'■' The Resident Magistrate, without going any further into the cases, stated that the conduct of Captain Brandon, in laying charges of larceny against his own son, without first making enquiries, was most improper. There did not appear to him to be the slightest foundation for supposing that a felony had been committed, and he would dismiss all the cases. - •:'■ ■ assault.1' ■ ■■ ••■"-■■ Emma Craigie deposed as follows ■•—On the 26th January, Mr. and Mrs. Culbert came to my house in Cashel-street, next door to Atkinson's, at 12 o'clock ; at night. I went to the door and spoke to them. While accused's husband was speaking to me, she raised her hand and struck me. Her husband tried to pull her back. After she struck me I struck her. She then banged the door in my face and broke my window as she was passing with her hand. T heard her say she would break the house in on me.

By Accused—l did not search your boxes. I did not strike you first. Mr. Hart did not see my blows. He came out of the bedroom and took me away. Sarah Grainger was next called and deposed as follows :—I was at Mrs Craigie's house at 12 o'clock on the night in question. Mr. and Mrs. Culbert came to the door. Mrs. Craigie saidtoMrs. Culbert " what do you want ? " They then had some conversation, and while Mrs. Craigie was speaking accused struck her. Mrs. Craigie then struck accused, and there was a scuffle, and Mr. Hart came out of the bedroom and took Mrs. Craigie away. Mr. Hart held Mrs. Craigie and shut the door. Accused then broke a window.

By the Bench.—None of them appeared to have been drinking. I lodge with Mrs. Craigie. Mr. Hart comes to the house every night. I have been here a year and a half. I came here in the Mary Ann. ■

Accused then stated that she did not strike Mrs. Craigie first, and that she did not go down with the intention of quarrelling with Mrs. Craigie. Accused then called Michael Brennan Hart, (who was subpoenaed for the defence) who deposed that he was at Mrs. Craigie's on the Saturday night in question at 12 o'clock, and that when Mrs. Craigie was speaking to the Culberts she suddenly stopped, and he heard a blow struck; he then got up and went to them and pulled Mrs; Craigie away. The Resident Magistrate said that as it was proved that accused had struck the first blow, he would fine her ss. and costs, lis. 6d. Mr. Hart applied for his expenses, and was allowed 6s. ATTEMPTED SUICIDE. Wm. Adams, who carried on the business of ginger beer manufacturer in Oxford terrace west, was brought up on the above charge. It appears that the unfortunate man had, on Saturday last, thrust a penknife into his flesh behind his right ear, deliberately turning it round two or three times hi the wound. The spot where the knife entered is, : acccording to the medical evidence, within a Jiair's breadth of the jugular vein, and the poor mail had a, narrow escape.He was perfectly sober at the time, but was in low spirits, and while he was being conveyed to the "police station he asked the police constable, who had his finger on the wound, to take it away and let him die. It appeared that he had been long subject to fits of depression. He was remanded till the Bth of February. Thursday, Jan. 31. (Before W. J. W. Hamilton, Esq., R.M.) FORGERY. Wm. Evans was brought up on the above charge. It appeared, from the evidence of J. H. Stewart shopman to Mr. Gould at Cookham House, that prisoner came there on Saturday, January 25, and asked for some goods. He purchased to the amount f\}i S '' tlnd tendered an order on Messrs. Gould and Miles, purporting to be signed by Messrs. Aeland and Tripp, for the amount of £5 10s. He took away the goods and .£3 15s. change. Stewart put the order among the other cash, where Mr «r got xt next moriling- The order is payable to Wm. Jones, and is endorsed Wm. Jones, and dated Nov. 13, iB6O. He asked prisoner if it was i ■ i rJ? p ? si Snature. and he said it was. He also asked him to put his name at the back, and he signed himself William Evans. '

Mr. Grosvenor Miles was next called Het^ that he had received the cheque from Mr f> d on the 26th January, to place to his (Mr o n „?» d account. He told Mr. Gould he did notthini/. S) order genuine, but would hold it till Mr Trim to town. He showed it to Mr. Tripp on th ? m° January, and he pronounced it a forgery, ir! ;, 0t' 1 gave information to the police. ' "en Mr. Charles George Tripp was next called Ti stated that he had never seen prisoner before that he was never in his employ. That I j"" 1 never given the order produced to the nrisnnn7ul any one else. It was not signed either by M? Aeland or himself. No portion of the order L ■ their handwriting. There was no similarity to at" Acland's handwriting in any part of the order i no other person had any authority to draw order • the name of Aeland and Tripp. He also stat^i m"i Mr. Aclaud left for England in the month of October

Mr. George Gould was next called and denoaed t the fact of his receiving the order on the 26th This closed the case for the prosecution. ' The prisoner made the following statement aft being cautioned in the requisite form by the It • dent Magistrate:—"The shopman asked m e if> was Mr. Tripp's signature, and I said Had tafcii, it as such. I had the order presented to me f took it not knowing but what it was good T ceived several other cheques at the same time win" it. I received this order from Mr. Fitch at Timarn He keeps an accommodation house. His wife civ it to me as change for a larger cheque which I qZI her. The accommonation house I mean is aboutr miles on the south side of the town of Timaru T received the money from Mrs. Fitch not Mr. Fitch " The; Resident Magistrate committed the prisoner for trial at the ensuing session of the Sunrnmn Court. * mo Kaiapoi.—Friday, Ist February, 1861. (Before J. W. Hamilton, Esq., R.M., W. C. Beswick C. Dudley, and J. Birch, Esqrs.) ' IMPORTANT CASE. Malcolm McFarlane was charged by Sub-Inspector Revell with wilfully obstructing a public thorough fare running through his (defendant's) section No 1271, on the south bank of the River Ashley. * The sub-inspector stated that on- information received by him he had examined the section. He found that the main line of road between Rangiora and the Saltwater Creek, running along on the terrace on the southern bank of the River Ashley, was fenced across in three places by a post-and-rail fence. There were slip panels where the road line was crossed by the fences, but on the eastern side of defendant's section the road was also crossed by a ditch and bank as well as by a rail fence. He had warned the defendant that the road must be cleared, which lie refused to do. The sub-inspector then produced an authenticated copy of defendant's Crown Grant obtained at the Land Office, which showed the line of road.

Mr. J. C. Boys, Government Surveyor, gave evidence that a considerable time before laying out defendant's section he had laid out the road in question, as a main road. It had always been used as the best and most direct line between Rangiora and Saltwater Creek. He had allowed in the acreage of the section for the amount of land taken up by the road. He had made this allowance on instructions from the Chief Surveyor, who had informed him that the Waste Lands Board had allowed defendant as a favor to take his section fronting on a reserve road along the actual hank" of the Ashley, a little north of the road set out along the terrace bank, in order to save him from being driven back into some very bad swamp. Mr. Boys gave further evidence that about a year ago he-had found the terrace road fenced across. He had such unusual difficulty in taking down the slip rails that he immediately went to defendant and asked him what business he had to fence the road across in that manner. He was greatly astonished by the boldness of defendant who retorted that he (Mr. Boys) had no business there at all, and that there was no road. Mr. Boys informed him that having laid out the road in his capacity of Government Surveyor, "lie must necessarily know perfectly where it ought to run. He proceeded to make good his passage through defendant's section.

Malcolm McFarlane, in answer to the charge, produced his ' Licence to occupy ■'; issued by the Waste Lands Board, and stated that it made no reference whatever to a road through the section. He denied being allowed to purchase as a favor fronting on the more northern road reserve, and he said that the road in question was not on the Christchurch map when he selected his land. When he went to fetch his Grown grant in April, 1860, they would not give it him at the Land Oflice, and said that he must wait till the new act for altering roads was passed. He also said that Mr. Dobson had given him leave to close up the road. The magistrates informed the defendant that he could not close up the Queen's highway, and that any one had a right to remove at once any obstruction to a free passage along it without being required to go to the authorities for their assistance. Any one detained by his obstruction of the thoroughfare would have a right to sue him for damages. Defendant had incurred a penalty of £5, and would be liable to have the charge laid against him again. The magistrates would however only inflict a small fine by way of warning, taking into consideration the fact that his 'Licence to occupy' did not allude to a reserve road through his section.

Fined 10s. and costs. The defendant gave notice that he should appeal to the Supreme Court.

The Court sat to-day till about six p.m., the other cares disposed of presenting no peculiar features. The hearing of several cases which could not be disposed of in one day was adjourned till next day, Saturday.