MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LII, Issue 5806, 4 October 1879, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH, i Friday, Cot. 3. (Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., 8.M.) Drunk and Disorderly. —Martin Warren was'fined 10s.—Mary Cunningham, who had only finished a twelvemonths’ sentence the previous day, pleaded lor another chance. She had been year after year in prison. Fined 20s.—A first offender was fined 6s. Larceny. —Thomas Henry Reed, a lad of 16 vears, was brought up on a charge of stealing from the shop of Jonathan Earnshaw, saddler, a quantity of goods, valued at £l7. The accused had been previously dealt with upon a similar charge, and as he bore a good character, the Magistrate merely bound his father over to, secure the appearance of the lad for sentence when called, upon, as Sergeant Morioe stated that it was necessary again to bring the lad up, in order that charges of receiving stolen property might be preferred against other persons. Accused pleaded guilty, and was committed for trial at the next criminal sittings of the Supreme Court. Receiving Stolen Property. John Ezra Ingles was charged on four informations with receiving stolen property from Thomas Henry Reed, knowing the same to he stolen, Mr Neck for accused. Thomas Henry Reed (accused in last case) deposed that he was an apprentice in the employ of Mr Earnshaw for the last six months. Sold six girths, a pair of spurs, and a stockwhip to accused (articles produced and identified). The month in which he sold the articles was, he believed, June. Accused said they were dear. He gave witness 5s for the stockwhip thong, Th« sold on separate days, and accused paid for the spurs, girthsV and other things in a lump. He only paid separately for the thong. Accused aid not ask where witness got the goods from. Witness told accused’s son where he was working. This was before the goods were sold to the father. Got the goods from Mr Earnshaw’s shop. To Mr Neck: I dealt on my own account, and received £2 4s from accused, and altogether received £4l9s 9d for all the goods sold, I got 3s for the spurs. The shop price of the stock whip is 7s fid, and the spurs 9s fid. Accused knew the whip came from Mr lamshaw’s shop, and that I was iu Mr Eamshaw’s employ. I did not tell him I got the thong improperly. I sold a great many other things. Jonathan Earnshaw proved the value of the girths, spurs and thong to be 245. They were taken from his shop. Sergeant Wilson deposed to finding the goods in question in accused’s possession. His Worship said a more negligent or careless piece of business he had never heard of. Accused was utterly careless whether the boy stole the things from his master cr not. He admitted there was no evidence to show that the accused did absolutely know the things were stolen, but he must have had a shrewd, suspicion that all was not right. The case must be dismissed, but he hoped it would be a caution to accused. He was glad accused had been put to some expense in (he matter, and hould only wish he (His Worship) could put him to more expense,; He would dismiss the case. The articles were ordered to he given up. Frederick Kerridge, a lad, was then brought up on a similar charge. Mr Slater appeared for the accused, Thomas Henry Reed de!>osed that he sold accused the saddle, stirrup eathers and irons, and pair of girths produced in August last. Witness told accused he could sell him a saddle cheap, and accused came on a Saturday and picked - out one at the shop and told witness to bring it to him. Accused took the saddle from the shop at a quarter past six on tho following Monday night. There was no one there but witness. Mr Slater said it was absurd to go on with a case like this. There was sufficient evidence to cause the case to be abandoned at once by the police. Evidence continued: Accused gave witness £2 10s for the saddle. Witn ss gave accused a pair • of spurs, which he lost, and subsequently gave him a second pair, accused telling witness to be careful how he took the second pair, in case the “boss” saw him. This was about July or the latter end of June. Mr Slater said Reed’s evidence was not to be credited, as he said in the first case hehadonly received £4l9s 9d for all the stolen property, while it was clear ho had received a great deal more. The Magistrate said the case must break down, but he would caution accused never again to hny goods under such suspicious circumstances. It was a most dangerous thing to buy out of the ordinary course of business. Accused did not leave the Court altogether with credit to his discretion. The cases against Frank Kerridge and Patrick Moor were then withdrawn by the police. His Worship discharged the informations and cautioned the accused to be careful in the future as to how they made purchase'. Thomas M’Oallutn was then charged with receiving stolen property from Thomas Henry Reed, knowing it to be stolen. Mr Izard appeared for accused. Sergeant Wilson said accused was a cab driver. Went to him on his stand on Sept. 24, and asked if he had bought anything from the hoy Reed. Accused denied having done so. Witness pointed ont a pair of rosettes on the horses, and accused said he got them from his brother. Witness then requested accused to go to Mr Earnshaw’* shop and see the hoy Reed. Accused did so, and in tho presence of the boy ho admitted getting a bit, two pairs of rosettes, a brush, one pair stirrup irons, tiro girths, and one saddle. Accused subsequently gave all the articles up. To Mr Izard: Accused said the boy came to him from time to time, and asked him if he wanted anything. Thomas. Henry Reed deposed that he sold accused a saddle, taro pairs of stirrup;irons, two odd girths, a breaking-in bit, and two rosettes. Accused gave witness £1 for the saddle, and 2s fid for the stirrup irons and a brush, 10s for a carriage bit, and Is fid for the rosettes. Accused had seen witness at the shop where he was working. Got tho goods for accused at his request. Accused told witness to he careful how he got them, and not let the “ boss ” see him* The articles were sold at various times—in June, July, and August. They were all got from Mr Barnshaw’s shop. When Sergeant Wilson asked accused, to come to the shop accused called witness Out and told him not to say anything except that his brother got the saddle. Accused did not ask witness where he got the goods. Jonathan Earnshaw identified the articles produced as his property. The saddle with fittings complete, was worth £7 10s, the stirrup irpns 7s fid, breaking bit 7* fid, the rosettes 2s fid. Never sold the goods or authorised any one to sell them. Reed waa never authorised to sell goods on hie behalf. Witness could only recognise toe goods by their general appearance and make. This - dosed tho case for the prosecution, and accused was committed for trial. Bail was ■ accepted—two suretie* of £6O each, and accused In £IOO. Libel.— Matthew Henderson was charged with maliciously publishing a defamatory libel upon Thomas Bates. Mr Joyce appeared for the defendant, and Mr Thomas for the prosecutor. Mr Henry Burge** Lane deposed; I am a batcher, redding in Ohiiitohuroh. I had a brother named-Frederick leme; he has been dead soma four yean. He left one child, named Elisabeth, known generally as “ Lizzie " Lane. His will was, proved In the Supreme Court. The executors were Mr

William White and Mr Sliver, jun. Latterly Mestr* White and Xhoma* Bate* hare been acting a* trustees and executor*. Mr Whit® jesides in Hawke*’Bay. Mr Bate* lor tome time past has been acting alone. He ha* been receiving the rents of my late citato, and to the best of mv knowledge h® Imi dealt with (he funds.’ I remember Monday, Sept. 8 last. I saw Mr Henderson twice that day. On the second meeting w* epoke about the estate of the late Frederick Lane. I think we met at my shop in Cashel street. He told mo of certain thing* that had taken place in connection with the estate and Mr Bates’ dealings. We started together to Mr Bates’ house. On the way defendant said he had a letter in his pocket which he intended sending to mo. He took out the letter and read it to me. It was in an unfastened envelope. I think I also read the letter. He said, “ There, you can have it,** and he gave it to mo. The letter produced is the one in question. Tho signature is “M. Henderson.” I subsequently handed th® letter to Mr Thomas, Solicitor, and have not seen It from that time till now. The letter was here put in. It is as follows: —“ Christchurch, Sept, 8,1879.—Mr H. B. Lane, dear, •* r » —l deem it my duty to inform ycu, as near relative to Miss Lizzie Lane, that Mr Thomas Bates, one of her execut rs, has fraudently made use of her monies for his own use, and is still doing so, and unless immediate steps are taken in the matter, the child is likely to be a serious loser, as Mr Thomas Bates is hopelessly insolvent.—And I am, yours truly, M. Henderson.” To Mr Joyce: I am the nearest relative to Miss Lizzie Lane in New Zealand. I have brothers. My eldest brother is in Christchurch. I have known the accused six or twelve months. I knew that Mr Henderson was assisting Mr Bates. It was before Sept. 8 that I knew Henderson was in Bates’ shop transacting business. On Sept. 4 I had a conversation with accused relative to the management of my brother’s estate. I did, not ask accused to put his statements in writing before he gave me tho letter. Ee-exaiained by Mr Thomas: The information given by accused re Thomas Bates, was volunteered by him. Lionel Benjamin, detective in the Christchurch Police force, stated that he arrested accused on Oct, 1, by virtue of a warrant. He said “I admit writing a letter to Ur Lane, in which I stited that Thomas Bates had stuck to the money in a trust matter, which is tho simple truth.” Witness forgot what trust matter was alluded to. Thomas Bates deposed: I am a chair manufacturer, carrying on business in Christchurch for some time past. 1 have acted as trustee in the late Frederick Lane’s estate. I have had the receipts of the estate, and have disbursed them. To (he best of my belief, I am (he Thomas Bates mentioned in the letter now produced. I know the hand writing of the accused, and I believe , the letter to be signed by him. I swear positively that the statements made in that letter, that I have fraudulently made use of Lizzie Lane’s monies for my own use, and am still doing so, is untrue. All business relations between accused and myself ceased before Sept. 1. This closed the case for th® Srosecution. No evidence was taken for th® efence. Accused was committed to take his trial at the next sitting of the Supreme Court. Bail was taken, prisoner in £2OO, and two sureties of £IOO each.

Civil Oasbs.— The adjourned civil action Kirby y. Paris and Frost was resumed. Mr Joyce appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Joynt for Philip Henry Kirby deposed that on May 6 last he entered into an agreement (produced) with defend* ants, by which he was to receive a salary of £lO per week, to commence from June 9 last. He had been in defendants’employ ever sinoe. He had paid several sums of money out of his own pocket on behalf of the defendants, and the total amount due to him by defendants was £169 7s 6i. He had abandoned the £69 7s 6J, and now sued for the £IOO. He had on Sept. 21 written to defendants for a settlement, and in reply received an account from Frost for £6O 2s. Defendants had never complained to him about the way ho had discharged his duties. He had never been dismissed, but on Saturday last Davis threatened to break his bones, and he had not been to the theatre since. To Mr Joynt: I have never seen another contract. I have been acting for Davis and Frost. Mr De Lias \ has been acting as his own agent. My dntieo as agent comprised arranging for the Company’s accommodation, and advertising to the best possible advantage in the eves of the public. My agency consisted in 'doing that portion of the contract which Davis and Frost were bound to fulfil. 1 did not at any time engage with De Lias to do anything ho had contracted to dp except at Napier. De Lias was to supply theatres, stage hands, half the orchestra, the advertising, bill posting, check and money takers, and half passages by rail and steamer from Auckland through New Zealand. I acted in Frost’s interests. I went ahead of the Company, and did the advertising. I have attended to the front of the house to see that nobody “ beat in.” I never work for less than 40 dols a week. My wages were 50dols a week with the Company. My claim is based on the last clause of the agreement engaging me as their agent. It was nothing to me what work De Lias had to do. I have not looked to De Lias for money; I have borrowed from him. 1 made a claim on De Lias for agency in bringing the Company from America. I did not enforce the claim; I might want to do business for De Lias yet, and so I don’t enforce the claim; I don’t think I ever will. Ido not admit Davis and Frost’s set-off. I only admit a trifle of the amount. I have not said to any person in New Zealand that Davis and Frost owed mo nothing. On July 16 last I filed my declaration of insolvency in Auckland. I have not yet got my order of discharge. Mr Joyce said he was taken by surprise in the insolvency. Of course hie client must abandon all claims up to the date of insolvency, but could claim for wages sin<» that date. Mr Joyce applied for a nonsuit, and cited authorities to show that all the insolvent’s property was vested in the Begistrar, and subsequently in the trustee. The plaintiff might possibly be able to hold money given him for his daily sustenance, but not any debts due to him. In the faee of the bankruptcy tbo contract was null and void. The plaintiff’s claim could only be quantum meruit. Under the 158th section of the Act Mr Kirby could not recover “a thing in action” till he had obtained an order of _ discharge. Mr Joyce submitted that the Eesident Magistrate could give judgment in equity. A bankrupt was entitled to have enough to keep him alive, and unless he had the power of recovering he would have to starve. He would ask that the case might be adjourned as he had been taken by surprise. The adjournment would not prejudice the other side as they had already applied for an adjournment till Friday week. Mr Joynt had no objection to the adjournment, except that Messrs Frost and Davis would be put to gnat expense by having to come from Timaru. The law was plain enough, and an insolvent should be careful not to allow his wages to get into arrears. His Worship allowed the case to stand over till to-day.

LYTTELTON. Fbibav, Ocx. 3. (Before Joseph Beswiok, Esq , R.M.) Absent Without Leave. —D. Thompson, » seaman on board tbo ship Crusader, was charged with this offence, Mr Nalder appeared on behalf of the ship. The Bench ordered accused to be sent on board. Civil Case.—De Coster and others r. Majze. In this case, which was heard on Wednesday, the Bench reserved judgment until to-day. Mr Nalder for defendant. His Worship nonsuited plaintiff with costs and solicitors* fee, £2 2s. —Morgan v. Robert Owen, claim £ll 11s 6d; judgment by default with costs.

ASHBURTON. Feibat, Octobke 3. (Before F. Guinness, Esq., R.M.) Civil Oases. —Judgment was given for the amounts' claimed, with costs, in the following undefended oases:—De Bidden ▼. Hearney, claim £3 5s ; same v. D. Gainey, claim £2 8s lOd; same ▼. John Boucher, claim £ll3s Id ; Dupics ▼. Patching, claim £2 6s ; Orr and Co. v. M. Nealas, claim £8 6s 6d (Mr Purnell for plaintiff) ; Nealae v. Ankin, claim £3.