LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XX, Issue 6817, 22 September 1883, Page 6

LAW AND POLICE.

SUPREME COURT.— Jodge's Chambers. Friuay, September 21. [Before Mr. Justice Gillies.] His Honor sat in Chambers to-day, aiid disposed of the late applications :— Probate.—On the motion of Mr. Browning, probate was granted of the will of : William Pils Gordon, deceased. Law Practitioners Act, 1882.—Qn the motion of Mr. Tole, William Joseph Napier was admitted and enrolled solicitor and barrister of the Supreme Court. Jj.m> TtttNSKEB Act, 1870.— rOn the motion of Mr. Dufaur (re caveats lodged by Walter Vere Stevens), the time was. extended for 30 days. CxEDiroiis' Tkustke of Thomas Briy r. Cwi asd Others. —This was a summons to show cause why proceedings should not be stayed.—Mr. S. Hesketh showed cause. The summons was dismissed with a guinea costs. BANKRUPTCY. —Meeting of Creditors. Rb W. J. Young.—A firat meeting of creditors in this estate for the election of trustee was held yesterday, in the Supreme Court building. The debtor was described as a native interpreter and agent. The liabilities were set down at £920,. and the assets, consisting chiefly of mining shares, were set down at £156, but these assets were stated to be of very little value. Mr. Thomas MaofTarlaue was elected trustee. POLICE COURT.—FRIDAY. [Before H. G. Seth Smith, Esq., K.M.] Drunkenness. —John Thackabury was fined 5s and costs, or in defcult twenty-four hours' imprisonment. Lakoeny.— Joseph McKowan, on remand, was charged with stealing some planking, worth'los, the property of Charles Rigg, on the 10th iDSt. The case was withdrawn. ■Sabbath Breaking.—John and William Jaggart appeared on remand to answer a charge of u breach of the Imperial Act 29 of CharUs 11., by exercising their wordly call- 1 iug as photographers on the Lord's Day at i Devouport. This case had been heard last week, and His Worship reserved judgment on a point raised by the defendants, that the Act did not apply to photography, and that they were not liable. His Worship now gave judgment; he said there must be i» conviction, and a fine of 5s and costs was. imposed on each. A second charge was withdrawn. Prohibition Order. —Mrs. Fanny Scott applied for an order prohibiting publicans and others from supplying her husband, William Scott, of Princes-street, with drink. She gave evidence as to his drunken habits, and Mtb. Charlotte Craig gave corroborative evidence. The order was granted. Chimney on Fire.—James Courtayne, for allowing the chimney of his house io be on fire, was fined Is and costs. Absconding Apprentice—William C. P. Corbett was again charged with absenting himself from the service of his master, Wm. Morgan, before the expiration of the term of his aprenticeship. Wm. Miller deposed that Corbett had abstnted himself altogether about 50 days since he became bound in February last. The defendant said he did not like the trade, end he was bound to it against his wish. He was ordered to find one surety of £20 to serve 41 days after the term of his apprenticeship expired. Mrs. Corbett said she had no oae to go security. The boy's father was dead for 11 years, and she bad only recently lost another of her children. Mr. Miller said he was willing to give the boy another chance if he would go baqk, but the boy still persisted that he did not want to go back. The Bench adjourned the case for a week, and ordered the defendant to return te his work. False Pretences. — Frederick Benjamin Charles Duval, better known as Dr. Duval, was charged with obtaining from Samuel Coombes the sum of £1 by means of false pretences, to wit, a valueless cheque, with intent to defraud. Mr. Browning, who appeared for defendant, pleaded not guilty, and asked for a remand. It appeared the defendant had a draft in the Bank of New South Wales in the name of Mr. Hardy, who was unfortunately in Mount Eden Gaol, suffering from delirium tremens. This was [ held as collateral security, and the cheque was drawn on the Bank of New Zealand, expecting to have funds placed to his credit by Mr. Haidy. When ho "found that Mr. Hardy was in gaol, he offered Mr. Coombes the £1, ' but Mr. Coombes could not accept it, having handed the cheque to the police. He applied , to have the accused admitted to bail, but ' Sergeant White opposed, and the application was refused. Remanded to the 25th inst. [ Malicious Injury to Property.—Henry Trace and John Phillips were charged, under u the Malicious Injuries to Property Act, with unlawfully and maliciously committing damage to a divelling-house, the property of Robert McLeod, at Waiheke, to an amount |. exceeding £5, on the 26th of July. Mr. Edward Cooper appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. James Russell for the defence. ' Witnesses were ordered out of Court. Mr. Cooper, in opening the case, said it was laid j under section 51 ot the Act which he quoted. 3 Mr. Russell said there were two informations, and he wished to know which they j. were to answer. Sergeaut White said the second summons was served on the defendj ants, as they lived a long distance away, and . in order to avoid the expense of having, to . send after them to servo fresh summonses on them. He would apply to withdraw ' that information. Mr. Russell did not sec how it could be withdrawn. Mr. Goopei e said he was certainly obliged- to the police for trying to save him trouble, but the prot secution should not suffer because of any . action taken by tho police. Another difii- , culty arose. The original information could not be found. Mr. Cooper alleced that it had been left in Court, and His Worship sug' ' gested that a fresh information should be (. laid. Mr. Russell asked to have a note made of the fact. His clients had been brought here at great expense, and if there was an\ ' civil remedy to recover for them h< Ij should certainly take it. They had now be, n ten days iu town in consequence o these informations. He would not object t< ' a fresh information, and a fresh summons His Worship said there was no inforinatioi before the Court. Mr. Cooper said that wai not the fault of the prosecution. They hai left the original information with the clerk o J the Court, and theretheirduty ceased, so tha if the application was made with a view to an; further proceedings for vexatious prosecu (j ton or false imprisonment, lie would inßis ' u that they should proceed under the origina information. Finally a fresh informatioi r, was laid, and Mr. Cooper then proceeded t open his case. The facts of the case a alleged by the prosecution were these : —Oi f the 26th of July, Mr. McLeod was th in owner of certain land in Waiheke, on whicl . _ was erected a small house. It had beei jg occupied by one Casscl (since dead), wit! 18 tho ownor's permission, but was empty 0i the 26th July. On that date one of th defendants was seen by some Maoris de t _ molishing the chimney, and on a subsequen " occasion both defendants were seen, to coir aB plete the demolition of the house, and carr j n away the timber. These facts would b j. deposed to by throe Maori witnesses, an 0 £ it would be shown that the timber was noi in the possession of one or both defendants who were engaged in manganese mining o the island. The procecutor deposed to boin the owner of the house, which he valued a £25. The defendants had no right to intei fere with it. The house, when he last sa.i it. was entirely destroyed. He saw Some c J the timber used for the manganese mine, a a floor and walls for the manganese padded Mr. Phillip.3 was working the mangnnee ' with some men, and Mr. Trace Was engage Pj carting out tho ore. In cross-examination h j admitted hairing previously laid an inform; £_ tion against other men for destroying a feiici . 2 but it was dismissed, because his title to th land was disputed, but that Was 300 yard j from the place where the house stood. H was examined on a plan which was put ir The fence which was destroyed in 187 ra was on the boundary. He subsequent! j brought an action in the Supreme Cour 1 ' against Charles Hay, and Mr. Mackechnie wa his solicitor. It was to recover for trespaa on a piece of land at Waiheke, arid fc j assault. Mr. Russell read from the record s'R the plaint and pleas, which Were that th ' laud used was a public road, which Wa • fenced by Mr. Mcl.eod, and knocked dow 3r by the then defendant. The case wen before th", jury. The jury found that fror Caßsel's boundary to the head of the bay is public highway, including the landing place The plan and tho original record, the forme , showing the road, was put in evidence, Th house which was pulled down was original! built by Charles Hay. A Maori, put th )d roof on it, and was paid £3 for it. Hay wa a in tho employ of tho Manganese Company Witness denied that it was the Madganes 5 > Company who paid for the house. Withes did not pay anything for putting tip th house. It was originally on Merrick's lam

and it was afterwards that witness bought it. Thomas Moyle, Who lived in the house six years ago by permission of Mr. Stovin, ma- : nager of the Manganese Company, gave evidence. Mr. McLeod afterwards told him he owutd the house. Mr, Oolemau, solicitor, attesting witness to the deed of transfer from. Isaac Merrick to Robert McLeod, gave evidence as to the signatures. The deed was dated November, 1577. E. Kersey Cooper, who had been mine manager for the. manganese mine at Waiheke from October, 1880, up to the beginning of this year, | gave evidence. There was no dispute about the ownership of the house while he was in charge. He never claimed: it on behalf of the manganese people. He never claimed a rit;ht to it, or he should have exacted a rent for it. He represented Mr, Tucker, and did not consider Mr. Tucker had a right to it, It was One of two things, either a public landing, or on Mr. McLeod's land. Charles Hay had possession of the house when witness came. He never disputed Cassels' right to occupy the house, and never exercised any control over the property. He left Waiheke in February this year, but had not worked the miue for some time before that. He did not when he gave up the mine put a lock On the house, or give the key to Trace. The witness was cross - examined at some length. After the adjournment, Mr. Cooper asked for an adjournment, as he had been unable to procure an interpreter. The remainder of his witnesses were Maoris. The case could not be concluded that day. Mr. Russell did ; not object to the adjournment on payment of costs. His witnesses were here from the island. His Worship Buid it was unusual to order costs at this stage. An application could be made again. The case was adjourned till Wedoesday. ,