LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 9269, 3 August 1893, Page 3

LA W AND POLICE.

SUPREME COURT.—In Chambers. Wednesday. [Before His Honor Mr. Justice Conolly.]

Application- for Refund of Money.—ln the case of the Queen on the prosecution of Detective Chryatal against James Griffin and others Mr. Cooper moved that a sum of £42 now in the hands of the police be handed over to Florence Griffin. Mr. Tola appeared for the police to oppose the application, and after hearing argument His Honor dismissed the motion without costs.

South Pacific Trading. Company. — In regard to the summons for directions to proceed with liquidation which had been heard on the previous day, Mr. Coopor now applied to amend the order by striking the words fixing the date on which proofs of debt and list of contributories be sent in, leaving the time for the appointment of liquidator as the '25th of August, further matters to be adjourned to that date. The minute was amended in accordanco with the application. Leave to Sell Estate.—ln the matter of the Administration Act and of Janet .Jones (deceased), Mr. Tunks moved that the administrator have power to sell certain real estate. The order was granted.

In Banco. Ann ScHNAtTKit v. the Congregational Union of 3Skw Zealand.—The action was originally brought by the plaintiff against the Congregational Union and the District Land Registrar, to restrain the latter from granting a certificate of title to the Congregational Union for certain land at Onehutiga, which she claimed was her property. The question had been argued at considerable length, Mr. Cooper (instructed by Mr. Brookfield) appearing for the plaintiff, Mr. Hesketh for the Congregational Union, and Mr. Cotter for the District Lund Registrar. A preliminary objection had been argued, his Honor's judgment practically dismissed the action, but Mr. Brookfield, in the absence of Mr. Cooper, asked that the action might be lowed to stand. Mr. Cooper now said that he accepted his Honor's view, that his ruling on the question of law practically dismissed the action, and the only question now was that of costs. His Honor had allowed £5 5s costs or argument to each of the defendant", and the question was, what further costs should be allowed. Mr. Hesketh and Mr. Cotter argued that as this was an action for an injunction costs should be allowed accordingly. His Honor allowed £10 10s costs to each defendent, and costs out of pocket in addition to the £5 ft-» costs of argument. WIIIUHT AND others v. LONG AND OTHERS. —This was an application by Mr. Buddie to have the action dismissed, as against certain of the defendants, the two for whom he appeared. Ho explained that he bad spoken to Mr. Armstrong, the plaintiffs' solicitor, and understood from him that he did not oppose the motion. His Honor said be observed that Mr. Buddie did not apply to have the action dismissed on its merits, but because the plaintiffs had failed to comply with an order of the Court, made in October last, to give security for costs, and he only applied on behalf of two of the defendants, of whom there some '20 in all. At this stage, Mr. Cooper asked leave to appear for the other defendants, and said if His Honor dismissed the action under rule 259, it would apply to the whole of the defendants. His Honor said his difficulty was, that plaintiff did not appear, and his not appearing would seem toinclicate that he was willing that it should be dismissed, but Ihe application was only with regard to two of the defendants. He should be disposed to dismiss the action as a whole, but that would be taking the plaintiff by surprise. The better course would ba to withdraw the present motion, and move that the action be dismissed as against all the defendants. He could see no provision in the rules for partly dismissing an action. Mr. Buddie .asked that instead of withdrawing the motion, it might be allowed to stand over until the first Banco day after His Honor's return from Cisborne, and no doubt some arrangements would be made in the meantime. His Honor consented, and allowed the motion to stand adjourned.

POLICE COURT.—Wednesday. Before Messrs. R. S. Bush, R.M., ami.). Pollard. .1.1'.] Drpnkkn.vf.ss.—Three first offenders were fined f>s and costs, or, in default, '24 hours' hours' imprisonment. Railway By-Laws.—John Hoc;an was charged with allowing his cow to stray on the railway line between Auckland and Onehunga. Mr. O'Meagher appeared on behalf of defendant, and pleaded guilty. His Worship inflicted a fine of la and costs. Larckny.—Joseph Williams was charged with stealing two glass tumblers, valued at If, the. property of A. C. Cooper, of the City Hotel, Albert-street. Evidence was given by Constable Quirk and Mr. Cooper as to the nature of the theft. His Worship said that as this was the first time the accused had appeared in Court, he would take a lenient view of the case, and sentence the accused to 48 hours'imprisonment.

Police Offences Act. .Tame" Harvey was charged with, since the 20th July, being an idle and disorderly person, and having no visible lawful means of support. Inspector llickson conducted the prosecution, ami Mr. \V. J. Napier appeared on behalf of the accused, who pleaded not guilty. Detective Grace stated that he had known the accused for twelve months, and to his knowledge he had done no work of any description. The detective made a statement as to the character of the accused, which counsel took exception to. His Worship ruled that the witness must confine himself to the charge. Witness was examined at considerable length by counsel. Detective McMahon gave corroborative evidence. Detective Chrystal deposed to having seen the accused about the streets at all hours of the night. Accused had told him that lie was disposing of shoddy good?. He generally endeavoured to get out of witness' sight. In answer to Mr. Napier witness said he did not think it was a laudable thing for a person to get out of the way of the police. Mr. Napier, in opening for the defence, said that this was an illustration in real life of the principal character in Victor Hugo's work, " 1-es Miserables," in which the hero having once stepped into crime was so shadowed and hounded down by the police that he found it impossible to make an honest living. Since his arrival in Auckland the prisoner had been hounded down by the police. When one detective was off duty another took up the running. Accused could never escape the vigilance of the police. Mr. Napier produced prisoner's bank book, showing that he had drawn regularly from the bank, also a number of rfJJCipts for goods purchased at various commercial houses in the city. He also mentioned the fact that accused had obtained a hawker's license from the City Council, and their by-laws provided that a man to receive a license must be of respectable character. He admitted that accused had once slipped from the right path, but he maintained that the principle of the English law was the reformation and not the creation of criminals. Mr. Napier produced a number of notes that the prisoner had on his person. The accused, on being sworn, stated that he had always had sullicient money to pay his way. Since the '20th July he had drawn from the bank £S 1.55. He was a licensed hawker, and a member of Tattersalls Club. The police followed him wherever he went. On several occasions he had to bo subjected to being searched. He denied being a member of a joint stock company of thieves, and asserted that the money in his possession was his own. His Worship, without comment, dismissed the information.