MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LIII, Issue 5949, 20 March 1880, Page 6

MAGISTERIAL.

r OHEiaTOHUROH. . , . Feidat, Mabchl9. . (Be tore Dr Deamer and His Worship tin ' Mayor.) Lunacy feom Dbink. Patnok Phalan wa brought up on the charge of; lunacy fron drink He^ was also charged with the wilfu destruction, to the value of 2U of glass belong in ff to Joseph Oram Sheppard. Accused, wh( in a miserable state, was remanded ti Lyttelton for eight days. Laeoeht by a Sbbtant. Ehxabetl Hoiison, alias Ellen Davis, was charged. witl the larceny br a servant of two rugs and sun dries, value £1 Is 6d, tho property of Simeor Stoddart. Mr Spackraan appeared for the accused. The complainant deposed that he was the proprietor of the Temperance Hotel Manchester street, and that accused had beer in his employ since Feb 18. He had on the Erevious morning missed two rugs, for which e paid 7s 6d each. In going to call a gentleman, he saw banging on the wall a petticoat which had been mode from one of the rugs, and the remainder of the cuttings he found under a closet seat. Could positively identify the fabric by certain green spots, and by the wear of it. A detective was sent for, and accused, who was charged with stealing the rtig, said she bought it at an auctiom room. The second rug had not been found. In the presence of the detective a knife, fork, and spoon were found in a bandbox under prisoner’s bed, and a small wreath of flowers, also a shirt, which the witness believed to bo his. A chemise was found, which had—witness supposed — been out out of a sheet, the culling scraps being , found under the closet seat. In cross-examination the witness had to be cautioned by the Bench to answer questions in a proper manner. He denied that accused tad ever said anything to him about a knife, fork, and spoon having been left by a lodger. Witness was questioned at considerable length as to a quarrel with accused, and he swore that he did not sh- ke his fist in her face. Ho had constantly seen accused about.'the house, but noto. **n her wearing the petticoat. .Detective O’Oo,' ■ . nor deposed that accused said she bought the petticoat in an auction room about seven months., ago, and that she. look the knife, fork, and spoon from one of l . the rooms, not knowing to whom they - belonged.; Mr Stoddart told witness ho. could identify the shirt found, both by the buttons and the neckband. To Mr Spaokman;- Prisoner made, no objection to her boxes being searched, and she stated that the shirt was her husband’s. She also said, before going downstairs, that she had another box which had better be searched. Mr Spacbnan called attention to section 47 of the Resident Magistrates’ Act, and asked that under the circumstances of the case evidence might be permitted from the husband, who purchased the goods which had been referred to, and could, therefore, show that the charge against this woman was utterly without foundation. The Bench decided to hear the statement of tho husband, who had been living in Stoddart’s Hotel. He said he bought three or four blankets at Alport’s about six or seven months ago, when J < was housekeeping in Tuam street. Whi he broke up the house, he kept the sheets and blankets. The peticoat produced was the portion of a blanket bought by his wife at Alport’s. The shirt produced belonged to witness, and-was torn at the back. His Wife gave notice to leave last Monday, there having been words between her and prosecutor, both on Saturday and Sunday. Accused made tho _ petticoat a few days previously, and hungitup in her bedroom, where any one could see it. Mr S jackman proposed to put accused into tho box, but Sub-Inspector O’Donnell submitted that it would be unprecedented to do this in a case of felony. The Bench did not consider it necessary to go further, there being, at any rate, a grave doubt in the case. Mr Spackman further commented upon the evidence of the prosecutor, and upon that which had been and could be adduced for the defence. He submitted that tbere was really no satisfactory proof, and that the information had been laid out of spite. The Bench dismissed the case, there being a doubt, of which accused ougnt to have the benefit.

LTTTKLTON. Feidat, Mabch 19. (Before J. T. Bouse, Esq.) Labcent.—E. Chapman, a seaman on board the ship British Empire, was charged ■with stealing the sum of £8 10s from the bunt of a shipmate. At the request of the police, accused was remanded to Tuesday, March 23.

Civil Case.—Bogers v. Curran, claim £3 16s. Mr Joyce for plaintiff, and Mr H, N. If alder for defendant. Ihis was a claim for wages as > seaman, defendant being master of the Croydon Lass. That the case might be heard mid disposed of a second justice was sent for, but was unable to attend. The Bench had no alternative but to remand- the case for Tuesday, March 23. OXFOBD. Thubsdat, Mabch 18. (Before D. Sladden, Esq.) Deunkenness and Cheating a Distubbance.—l?. Colrevy was charged by the police with being drunk and creating a disturbance at the Oxford racecourse, on March 17, and was fined £2 and costs. B. Wratt and E. Smith were charged with a similar offence in a licensed house, and with causing a breach of the peace. They were each fined 10s on the separate offences. TIMABU. Thubsdat, Mabch 18. (Before E. G. Stericker, Esq., and his Worship the Mayor.) Deune and Disobdeelt.—A first offender was dismissed with a caution. Charles Fobel, also charged with resisting the police, was sentenced to one month’s imprisonment with hard labour, ASHBUBTON. Feidat, Mabch 19. (Before F. Guinness, Esq , 8.M.) Deunkenness. —John Cunningham, an old offender, was charged with being drunk and disorderly. His Worship said it was no good being lenient with him, he would be sent to gaol for three months. Labobnt or a Tethbb eopb. Philip Crumb and John Miles were charged with having stolen a tether-rope Eev J. B. Westbrooke slid his horse' was tied to v, fence adjoining his house, and that about 7 p.m. ho found that the rope was cut off the horse’s neck. The rope produced was the one. Witness accompanied the constable who arrested the accused. Constable Daley proved the arrest of the accused, and to finding the rope in the passage of Baldwin’s Hotel. Thomas Ireland, another witness, deposed to having seen the accused near Mr Westbrooke’s residence on the night of March 16. Witness eaw them go towards Baldwin’s Hotel, and he followed them up, suspecting that they had committed some theft. Witness saw .them arrested by the constable. Mr Branson said that both the accused were very drunk and had merely taken the rope out of bravado. Mr Westbrooks asked his Worship to deal leniently with the accused as they were not of the ordinary criminal class. His Worship ’ said he would take a very lenient view of the case, and would discharge the accused, giving them a strong caution as to their future conduct. Cbeating a Disturbance.—James Patterson and William Henry were brought up in custody, charged with being illegally on the premises of William Barrett, and creating a disturbance in a public street. Mr Branson appeared on behalf of the accused. After hearing the evidence, which went to show that one of the accused had created a disgraceful raw, His Worship sent tlia accused, James Patterson, to gaol for three months, with hard labour, the other was discharged, as there was a doubt as to his identity. Civil Oases —Parker and Co. v. Hessey; claim, £l2 3s 3i. No appearance of defendant; judgment by default. W AIM ATE, Thubsdat, Mabch 18. (Before B. Baetham, Esq., 8.M., His Worship the Mayor, and J. E. Parker and T. Teschemaker, Esqs.) ! Neglect to Maintain.—B. Evans was charged with neglecting to provide his wife

. with ; the neceßßary>'mbhhs ef 1 support. - Dpfondant was ordered to-pay in defend mx month*’: impmoameiit, with hardlabour. - * - « : ‘" v i/’iruwL ' dm Casks. —Dr Headleys vM.Thyne, claim'£2o. damage* by cattle trespass. Mr Hawkins for plaintiff, Mr defence. .It appeared that bean two instances of trespass by cattle, namdy, on Feb. 20 and 26 last., The first was admitted.by tho defendant*-but that oAthe second occasion demod f t>l bo * o dank and his wife. The plaintiff e gwom was the only witness in support of thO f ßecond charge, and the Bench, giving .the defendant the benefit of the doubt, gave judgment in £2 and costs.—Symons 1 v.' Scott, interpleader, and Hawkins v. Scott, do. These cases arose out of tho partnership disputes betwoenJohn Scott of Hakateramea and J, and T. Meek,' of Smaru The bailiff of the Waimate Begident Magistrate’s Court had seised 40 acres of oats, and endeavoured to sell by auction Scott’s interest in the crop, but one Orr, the manager of Jii and Meok, had .prevented the sale by warning tho ;publio against purchasing* stating that Scott had no interest in the oats. The Bench decided that the inter- • pleader was. hot necessary, as no Witten claim to the property had been made. No order was made, and the Bench dismissed the case. , ;i ' ■ Bebach of the Bkoistration Act.— Poff was charged bylthe Regiatrar of Births with non-registration of the birth of his child. Fined 5s and costs 7e. - 1 1