LAW AND POLICE

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9495, 26 April 1894, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.—Wednesday. [Before Mr. H. W. Northcroft, S.M.J T. and S. Morrin and Co. (Limited) v. Captain Firth and the Owners of the Steamship I> dramayo.—This was an action to recover £1" 16s, for damages sustained by certain wire shipped by the luclramayo from London to Auckland. Mr. Buddie appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. S. Hesketh for the defence. The evidence had virtually closed on Saturday, but before counsel addressed the Court, the Magistrate desired that Mr. Pond, analytical chemist, who had previously given evidence, should bere-cailed to speak as to the deposits which he found on the wire coils. Mr. Pond, now recalled, was examined by Mr. Buddie. In regard to "sweating," he said that a vessel crossing the tropics must necessarily be affected by sweating, but the action of sweating could not have affected the galvanized wire to the extent to which some of the coils were affected. There were two conditions, boiled oil and cream of tartar on them, which it would be impossible to produce by sweating, and the alkaline nature of the incrustation could not be formed by sweating other than in the presence of ammonia. In reply to Mr. Hesketh witness said he took the incrustations from five coils of wire. He said that sweating per se did not affect galvanised iron, as was shown by the _ fact that such a quantity arrived in bright good condition. He found more damage caused by leakage or particles of soda falling on galvanised iron than from any other cause. He was further examined as to the oil he found on the wire. He could not say. what oil it was, but it was an oil, and there was tartaric acid. By his Worship : The oil, etc., could not not nave been precipitated from contact with the vapour, such as caused sweating. Mr. Hesketh . was anxious that Mr. Pond should identify the coils which he had examined, and the Magistrate, counsel, and witnesses proceeded' to Morrins' store, for that purpose. Mr. Pond said he could positively identify the coils ,of wire, but he believed they were the same. Mr. Hesketh submitted that the plaintiff were not entitled to recover, and that the evidence of identification was too. weak and insufficient to establish '■ that they were the same coils received in September. The numbers and marks were as shown in evidence frequently duplicated. He submitted that there was no satisfactory evidence that these coils had arrived by the indramayo in September last, and if His Worship was not satisfied that point then plaintiffs were not entitled to recover. In regard to the broken bath, he submitted they were protected by the bills of lading. He quoted the case Nottebohn v. Rischter, 18 Q. B. div., page 63, in support of his contention, and further argued that even if the stained coils were held to be identified the defendants were relieved from responsibility by their bill of ladling agreed to by the parties. Mr. Buddie replied at some length on the evidence and the authorities quoted. His Worship reserved judgment until Monday morning at ten o'clock, intimating that in the meantime he would look into the authorities quoted. POLICE COURT.—Wednesday. [Before Mr. R. S. Bush, S.M.] Drunkenness.—One first offender was dismissed with a caution, and John Symonds was fined 203, or in default seven days' imprisonment. Alleged Perjury.—David Sterling, otherwise Daniel _ Sterling, was charged with having committed perjury in the evidence he gave in the trial of Frederick Ellis at the sitting of the Supreme Court, held at Auckland on _ the '21st March, by saying that he had received from William John McNamara, one gold watch, one gold chain, for the purpose of selling for £2, and on a certain day did return the watch and chain to the said W. J. McNamara. On the application of Sergean t Gamble, the accused was remanded to the 3rd May, bail being allowed in his own recognisances £50, and two sureties of £'23 each.

Broaching of Cargo.—Five articled seamen belonging to the American barque Lottie Moore, named Frank Andersou, Otto Poulsen, Mcholas Bradhlin, John Gallagher, and John Glover were charged with having, on the 21st April, feloniously entered the hold of the said vessel, and stolen therefrom goods to the value of £4 10s. Sergeant Gamble applied to the Bench to have the information amended to embezzling cargo. The defendants pleaded guilty, and Mr. J. O'Meagher, who appeared on their behalf, asked to have them summarily dealt with, under sub-section 8, section 123, of the Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877. His Worship consented to this course being adopted. Mr. O'Meagher asked His Worship to make the sentence a very light one. The defendants bora excellent characters from the captain .opto. vsw»» men had al wky s'fnos£ oK?.' dient, and the captain was sorry that this trouble had como upon them. His Worship said the olfence that the men had pleaded guilty to was of a very serious nature. He sentenced them each to three months' imprisonment with hard labour. Unattended Carriages.—William Hill was fined IDs, and costs 345, for leaving his Vehicle unattended on the Queen-street Wharf. .John Shannon and Samuel Pierce were similarly charged, and each fined 10s, and costs 31s.

Alleged Insulting Behaviour.Pour young men, named respectively Patrick O Connor, John O'Connor, Norman Mair, and Herbert Willet, resident in Lake Takapuna district, were charged with having, on the 18th April, used insulting behaviour to one Frank Mercer, in a public place, to wit, at the entrance of the public bar of the Lake Takapuna Hotel, Ta.kapuna, whereby a breach of the peace was occasioned. Mr. Brassey, with the permission of the police, appeared on behalf of the prosecution. The defendants did not appear, but were represented by Mr. C. S. S. George, who stated that they were under a misunderstanding with regard to the matter, and were not aware that the case was to have been called that morning. Sergeant Gamble said the prosecution were prepared to proceed at once, as all witnesses were in attendance. Mr. Brassey said the assault had been of a very serious nature. The complainant had been badly assaulted by two of the defendants, and had to get two men to see him home, He was a gardener in the employ of Mr. Porter, at the Lake. Mr. George urged the Bench to grant a remand. His Worship granted an adjournment to the 2nd May.

MERCER MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Tuesday, 24th April. [Before Captain Jackson, S.M.] Hunter Brothers v. W. Donaldson.— Claim, £34 16s Bd, for goods supplied. It appears the defendant was a fireman on the New Zealand railways receiving 10s per diem. On being transferred to the Palmerston railway section he had omitted to pay his grocer's account. He now tiled a defence by affidavit in the Christchurch S.M. .Court, under the Statute of Limitations, that, as more than six years had elapsed since the goods had been got, he was not therefore liable for the amount claimed. The Bench thought otherwise, and gave judgment for the amount claimed with costs. The same plaintiffs got judgment against several other persons who did not appear to defend the cases, for various amounts, under similar circumstances as the above. Wiremu Rewharewha v. Whiteside.— Claim, £8 10s, for work alleged to have been performed on the road by various Opuatia natives. After hearing the plaintiff's evidence, judgment was given for the defendant, with £4 4s costs, His \\ orship reading the Maori plaintiff a salutary lesson on this case. Police v. Tigariff.—The defendant was charged with having an unregistered do? of over six months old in his possession. The dog had been registered since the information was laid, Defendant was fined ss, double the cost of the collar, and 12s costs.— [Own Correspondent.]