MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXX, Issue 10104, 1 August 1893, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH, Monday, July 31.

(Before J. P. Jameson and T. York, Esqs.)

Drunkenness. —A first offender was fined 5s and cab hire. Alleged Larceny.— Jamas Walker was charged with breaking into the office of the Sumner Borough Council and stealing seven blank cheques and two blank receipts valued at 83. The Bench granted a remand till Thursday next on the application of Inspector Broham. False Pretences. —Richard Corkrane was charged on remand with obtaining £72 10a from Frederick Allen on Sept. 15, 1892, by false pretences. Inspector Broham appeared to prosecute, and Mr Donnelly for the accused. Frederick Allen deposed that he was a cab proprietor residing in Madras street. In September, last jenr, accused came to him and offered to sell him a hansom cab, borse and harness, for £7O cash. Ho came back several times and ultimately offered to dispose of the cab on terms. The son of the witness heard of this offer, and said the cab had better be obtained for him. Corkrane had told him that the cob wag clear, and that he could advertise it. Witness made enquiries and found no one having a lien on the cab. Finally, on Sept. 13, 1892, he bought the cab, horse and harness for .£73 10s. The terms were .£4O cash and £32 10a in weekly instalments of £1 without interest. Produced the receipt. Then took possession of the cab. Made the final payment on May 8. On July 7 a bailiff seized the cab on behalf of Mr Raphael. At tho time of buying the cab Mr Raphael had told him that he had no lien on the cab. This be had believed or be would not have negotiated for the purchase. To Mr Donnelly : Laid the information against Corkrane on July 11. If Mr Raphael was right in Ida claim, ho (witness) did nob wish to bring civil proceedings against him; but this was not exactly tho object of the present criminal charge against Corkrane. His son had made an agreement with Raphael to keep the cab, under a security, providing the claim was right. In return Mr Raphael had handed over to his son all the securities, bills of sale, promissory notes, &c., he had of Corkrane’a. He had been told that if Mr Raphael had nothing on the cab it was all right. He had gone to Raphael and told him that he was about to buy the cab. Noae of the cabman had ever hinted that there was a mortgage over the cab. Corkrane had backed a bill for him for £2O of the £4O cash paid him. Frederick Charles Raphael deposed that be was a financial agent carrying on business in Cashel street. Advanced £66 to accused on a bill of sale over a horse, cab and harness. It was in force on Sept. 15 last year, and Corkrane owed him £62 3s at that time. Corkrane had no authority to dispose of the c4b at that time. The hill of sale was still in force now. Heard that the cab had been disposed of on July 7. Allen came to see him about tbe cab, and avked if a man named Corkrane owed him any money. Witness required to know the man’s business, and said he could not give him any information without an order from Corkrane. To Mr Donnelly. Never told Allen that there was nothing owing on the cab, and the statement that he had done so was distinctly untrue. His ledger showed that £66 had been paid oa June 23, 1893, to Corkrane. On March 6, 1893, Corkrane obtained a further loan of £39 on the bill of sale. A promissory note was given for the amount. Corkrane had offered him further security ever a horse and sulky, which, as it turned out, did not belong to him. There was £ls owing of tbe £66 on March 3. The bill of sale professed to give him security over everything Corkrane had or might acquire. On April 10 a further sum of £lO was advanced under the bill of sale, over the horse and cab. He had to consider the original bill of sale a chief security, and he regarded all the loans as being one transaction. Knew Corkrane was following the occupation of a horsedealer. Had never said he did not care to whom Corkrane sold tho cab, as long as he settled the loan. Had handed over to Allen all the security he had had from Corkrane,and taken apromissory note for the sum of £62 lls. Mr Donnelly subrnii ted that there was no case against the accused. He considered that false pretences were absent, because Allen had not acted upon Corkrane’s statement, but upon that of Mr Raphael. Inspector Broham said that Allen had said that he had acted upon the statements of both. The Bench said tho case must go for trial. Mr Donnelly said he wished to bring more evidence. He would show that there was no intention to defraud on Corkrane’s part. He submitted that the three loans advanced by Raphael were separate ones, and that Corkrane had repaid every penny of the original £66 loan. The other transactions were separate ones altogether, and Raphael had required further securities. Therefore the repayment of tbe £66 gave back the cab to Corkrane, and on this fact he based his case. In Raphael’s ledger the various loans had been kept separate, and this showed that they were separate transactions. The £66 had been cleared up, and therefore the cab was free and Corkrane could sell it. After selling the cab to Alleu, Corkrane had continued to pay up to Raphael, and thus the element of fraud was completely absent. It was a matter of law that if a man bought an article that was under a bill of sale he had acquired a good right to it. Any litigation thereby arising was for the Civil Court. Allen could have held the horse if he had pleased. The Bench said that it looked as if there had been an intention to defraud. At the time of the purchase there was a bill of sale in existence. There was a clear statement of untruth when Corkrane had told Allen that there was no mortgage on the cab. The accused must stand his trial. The prisoner reserved his defence, and was allowed bail, himself in £IOO and two sureties of £SO each. (Before E. Beetham Esq., E.M., and E. Westenra, Esq.) Civil Cases. —W. Jameson v. M. J. Sherwin, claim £6. Judgment for plaintiff by default, with c^sts.—W. H. Hobson v. J, Eickards, claim £3l and £3O for illegal distress and damages. MrStringerfor plaintiff. Mr Joynt for defendant, who put in a counter claim of £lO for rent. These cases had been adjourned on two occasions. J. Paul and C. Edgar gave sxpeit evidence_ in regard to the signatures on some receipts alleged to have been given by Rickards to Hobson. On the application of Mr Joynt the cases were adjourned till Sept. 4to enable some evidence to be taken at Gisborne.—The Church Property Trustees v. W. Hanrahan, claim £25 lls 61 for rent. Mrßeswick for plaintiffs, for whom judgment was given with costa.— The cases of E. R. L. Knight v. Helen Saxton, claim £6 19s 9d ; G, Dixon v, D. Murphy, £l4 la 8d; and R. Wells v. G, Hamili, £3 10s, were adjourned till August 8. KAIAPOI. Monday, July 31. (Before H. W. Bishop, Esq., E.M., and J. L. Wilson, Esq.) Breach of Borough By-laws.— John Batch was fined 3s and costs for firing a gun in the Borough on July 27, contrary to the Borough by-laws.