ARROW POLICE COURT.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Volume I, Issue 34, 26 August 1863, Page 5

ARROW POLICE COURT.

(Before J. S. Hickson, Esq., R.M.) August 20, 1863. Robert Kirkwood was charged with stealing a watch, the property of R. S. Allan. Robert Allan stated that he was a baker residing at the Arrow. On the evening of the 14th inst. he left his shop for about an hour and when he returned he found a silver watch stolen, which had been hanging up by the side of the bed; a dog was generally tied in the shop ; the prisoner had been in the habit of frequenting the shop lately ; the dog would have bitten a stranger; the stolen watch was purchased by prosecutor from Mr. Foord, watch-maker. It is worth 19s. 6d. James Foord stated that he recollected selling a silver watch to Mr. Allan, but did not remember the number; the prisoner came into his shop yesterday about six p.m. and offered a watch for sale. Recognized the watch; had had the same watch on two occasions and could swear it was the same watch he had sold to Mr. Allan. When prisoner came into his shop he asked him to buy the watch, to which he assented, and offered 255. for it. Prisoner then went away and did not return ; he said he had got the watch from a man who was going to the Woolshed and refused to take 255. for it. Cross-examined—Witness told the prisoner he might have another watch and 10s. for the watch in question; or would change a pistol or gun for it. Richard Barrett, detective stated that he had received information of a watch having been stolen and arrested the prisoner in the Shamrock Hotel, but on searching him could not find the watch. After the usual caution he asked prisoner where the watch was; prisoner replied that he had got it from a boy in ths street. Witness then went with him to where he stated the boy lived, but could not find him. Prisoner then said that he got the watch from a man whom he thought he could find. This man could not be discovered. Sentenced to one month's imprisonment with hard labor. August 24. W. Clements v. Sarah King.—£7 10s. Goods sold. Plaintiff—lt is concerning a clock left to be raffled with defendant, who raffled it for £6 and never paid me; also a chain which was borrowed and said to be given to her. I have no witnesses. Defendant—ln the first place, in May plaintiff sent me a clock to raffle. I gave him £5, as £1 was to be spent in drinks. A witness of the transaction is now in Dunedin. The barmaid heard it as she was lying ill in the next room. Plaintiff gave the chain in April as a present. On Saturday week last he asked money for the clock, saying, " Never mind the chain." It is merely out of spite the present action is brought forward; we have had several affairs of this sort; he has summoned me before and ought then to have claimed the clock. Ido swear I paid £5 to plaintiff. Hannah Taylor—l remember Mrs. King paying plaintiff for a clock. I was lying ill. Plaintiff asked payment for goods; defendant refused; but offered to pay for the clock, and did pay £5. I distinctly heard the transaction. By the Plaintiff—Did not Mrs. King threaten you with dismissal unless you came to give evidence ? No. By the Court—A very improper question. I have no hesitation now in dismissing the case. Case dismissed with costs.