POLICE- COURT.—Tuesday.

New Zealand Herald, Volume VII, Issue 1899, 16 February 1870, Page 5

POLICE- COURT.—Tuesday.

(Before S. Morrow, Esq., J.P., and H. M. Jem's, Esq., J.P.) ALLEGE!) LAMENT. Marl in Dwyer was brought up under warrant, charged by Mr. George Staines with tak.ng awav timber to the value of £1. The defendant pleaded guilty. . Mr. Staines prayed the leniency of the Bench on behalf of the prisoner, as he had given -valuable information as to a largo quantity of timber which had been removed. : The Bench discharged tlie prisoner with a caution. > JJKEACII 0* MUNICIPAL POLICE Af.T. Kate Conway, a woman who said she was eighty years of age, was charged by James

Rolfe with -wilfully breaking a square of glass. The offence was committed as long ago as the 4th inst. The old lady wn3 fined 5s and costs, in default to be imprisoned for 48 hours. (Before H. Morrow, Esq., J.P., and C Davis, Esq., J.P.) Bonjamin Clarke was charged with obtaining money under false pretences (£3B), being the price of a sliuve in the Long Drive Company. Mr. Naughton conducted the prosecution, Mr. Joy defended the prisoner. The following were the facts deposed to in evidence adduced : — Frederick W. Balinn, deposed: I am a miner residing at Shortlaud. I was the owner of a share in the Long Drive Gold Mining Company up to the 7th of this month. The prisoner came to me, and I tokl him that I wanted him to sell the share for inc. He said lie would do so. He was to come to me first and tell me the best price he could get for it. He was to accept no offer and give no transfer without consulting me. Ho did not consult me in reference to a stile made to a person named Crosby. lie had no authority from me to sell or transfer the share to Crosby. I never authorised the transfer produced to be handed over to Crosby. The transfer is signed F. W. Balam. It is not my signature, and I never authorised tlio document to be executed. Cross-examined by Mr. Joy : The prisoner ha 3 been acting for me as agent. His partner negotiated the purchase of this share fof me. Mr. Joy : His firm, Sir. Witness: Yes. Mr. Joy : And then having purchased, you asked him to sell the shave ? Witness : On the 2nd February I had not revoked the authority to sell. I bought Shotover scrip from him at the same time. I did not say sell if you can any way, but get mc a £1 profit. I believe I did say " Don't let a chance slip, but get me a pound profit—to sell even at. a pound profit." I also made arrangements with a Mr. Deane for the sale of the same ( shares.T Mr. "Wcbbewns introduced into the.matter. He knew the share was sold. I never told prisoner that I was negotiating the sale of this share with other parties. I was satisfied with the bargain I made myself. He-examined: The sale of the share for £64 would give me a profit of £1. To sell it at £38 would be a great loss. The prisoner was not to sell under any consideration unless he came to me first. He sold on the 2nd, but on the 7th he gave me a receipt to show that I was still possessor of a share. He did not tell me he had sold. John Crosby, a miner, deposed that he bought two Long Drive scrip from Mr. Nowman for £76. An agent transferred the scrip to me. The transfer produced is oue of them. It is a transfer of a share to me, purchased for £38.

Mr. Joseph Newman deposed : I recently sold to the witness Crosby two Long Drive shares at £38 each. One was represented by the transfer produced. The transfer is made by F. W. Balam. I saw Crosby sign tho document. The prisoner Clarke brought me tho share to sell, and I gave him £38, less the commission.

Cross-examined : I.dealt with the prisoner as a sharebroker. He represented Jftnjself to be the acting agent for Mr. Balam. ~I ascertained at the Long Drive Company that tho share stood to Balam's credit.

James Stodhavt, clerk to Mr. TothiU,-iden-tified .the transfer of the share.

Mr. Joy J'asked the Court not entertain the. case, "as ifc Was one purely "for a civil court tr> set matters aright between principals and agents. He-would ask tho'Bench .to'censure the prosecutor.., for,, having .. vindictively brought this^caae ; to a Police Court, forthe agency was, proved, and the only consideration remaining 'was that as high a price was not obtained' as the' prosecutor expected. For the evidence—was-that the principal without. haring refolfed the, agency, ■went behind the gent's,back anil made another sale. But the mostexiribrdinary feature in the .qajejras, ihaUtlie, was laid by Mr. .Yet' thra Mr. Webbe was in the Court'during the-whole hearing of the case. Tet the very man who set -the criminal law in motion, did- not dare to get into the box; nor did those 'who "conducted the prosecution dare to put Mr. Webbe. in the box. It was a shame aiidV'ti' to' set the criminal law irt\ motion, .when the case was one solely;'.' f<ir ;tiieJ - Civil Courts. There was notliirtg pr&yed' except such an authority between'prweigal and agent as would enable the Civil CouttPto say that there was an indebtedness. ' There was no, ground whatever for a criminal prosecution. '

Mr. Naughton contended for a right to reply.

Mr. Joy said it had been ruled many times that where there was no evidence for the defence, the prosecution waived its reply, and the usual practice was that the prosecution called evidence in support of the charge, and the prisoner replied. It was another proof of the feeling that animated the prosecution to insist upon it.

The Bench ruled that Mr. Naughton had a right to reply. Mr. Naughton brought under the notice of the Bench the ingenuity with which Mr. Joy had omitted all notice of the fact that the signature, F. W. Balam, was forged. Mr. Joy said there was no evidence whatever against the prisoner on that point. The Bench committed the prisoner for trial, inasmuch as the prosecutor swore that the signature to the transfer was not in his handwriting, nor did he authorise anyone to put his name to such a document.

The prisoner was admitted to bail in two sureties of £50 each, and his own recognisances in £100.