RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 767, 12 November 1886, Page 10

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Friday, November 5. (Before Mr H. S. Wardell, R.M.) BREACH OF THE PROPRRTY ASSESSMENT ACT. Alfred Boardman was charged with committing a breach of the Property Assessment Act by neglecting to furnish the Department with any information of his property, as required by the Act. Mr Bell appeared for the defendant, who pleaded guilty. In accordance with the Act, his Worship inflicted a penalty of £5, with costs, and ordered the defendant to pay three times the amount of tax of which he was liable. UNSTAMPED PROMISSORY NOTE. Joseph Gorton Bowern was agaiu charged with failing to affix a stamp to a promissory note for the sum of £3O, drawn in favor of Mr W. J. Scott (since deceased). Inspector Browne conducted the prosecution, and Mr Jellicoe appeared for defendant. Mr Jellicoe admitted that the document referred to at the previous hearing of the case was a promissory note, and nob stamped. His Worship remarked that the admission came rather late. No further evidence was taken. Mr Jellicoe contended that there was no evidence whatever to prove that the defendant had issued the document. The making of the note, he said, was not an offence under the Act. His Worship held that there was I no ground for doubting the fact of the issue, j He pointed out that the full penalty under the Act was £SO, but he would only inflict a reasonable one. He thought the matter might have been settled between the parties in a much easier way. His W orship imposed a fine of £5, with costs amounting to £2 ss. Subsequently his Worship reduced the fine to £3, in consideration of the large amount of costs. Mr Jellicoe asked whether the Court would state a case for appeal on the question of law, whether the circumstances amounted to an issue, and whether the person liable in respect of a bill could discharge any liability previously incurred at any time before the payment of the bill. His Worship agreed to comply with tho request. PASSING SPURIOUS COIN. Allan Coekburn, on remand, was charged with having uttered a false coin, which was

apparently intended to pass for a sovereign, knowing the same to be false. Inspector Browno conducted the case, and Mr Jellicoe appeared for the prisoner. Francis F. Grady, jeweller, deposed that he remembered a coin similar to the one produced being brought to him by the accused. The coin was of the kind known as the “lion ” shilling. Believed that the witness wanted it for a pendant. It was not an uncommon thing to gild coins for use as articles of jewellery. When intended for such purposes it was usual to put rings in them. The accused gave no such instructions. By Mr Jellicoe: Had colored other coins for use as scarf pins. Would not mistake the coin for a sovereign. It- was the kind of shilling least likely to pass for a sovereign, for the reason that it was becoming rare, and people kept them as curiosities. Would be surprised to hear of any person taking the coin for a sovereign. This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr Jellicoe contended that there was no evidence that the coin had been uttered as a sovereign. His Worship said he could not take the same view of tho matter. His impression was that a fraud had been committed. What the result of the case would be in the Supreme Court he would not prognosticate, but the prisoner would have to stand the ordeal of a trial there. Mr Jellicoe reminded his Worship that when the ease was previously before him, he had said there was no evidence against the prisoner. His Worship replied that to-day his judgment was more mature. Evidence had now been brought forth to show that the accused could not have understood the coin to be a sovereign. The accused was then formally committed for trial. Bail was allowed—prisoner’s own recognizance for £SO, and two sureties for a like amount.

; . ROBBERY. t ; George Raddon and Henry Watson, alias: Charles Ruskoe, were brought up, oa remand, and charged with having, on October 22, broken into the premises of Messrs Shine Bros., drapers, Cuba - street, and stolon therefrom a quantity of drapery. Inspector Browne conducted the prosecution, and Mr Jellicoe defended. Robert Shine, j one of the partners, gave evidence to the effect that when he opened the shop at 8 o’clock on the morning of the 23rd he saw several burnt matches on a ledge in the shop. Also noticed the imprint of a dirty boot. Witness would not sw;ear that the clothes produced were the same that were missing on the 23rd. Cross-examined : The doors and windows were ail right whan he opened the shop. He had the key in his pocket. Detective Chrystal,. who arrested the prisoners, also gave evidence. His Worship committed the prisoners to take their trial at the next sitting of the Supreme Court. .BREACH OF THE BY-LAWS. The case against Albert Milton, for a breach of the hackney carriage by-laws, was withdrawn. CIVIL CASES. - In the case of Thomas Dickson v. Wm. J. Woods, claim £23 7s lid, with £3 3s costs,; judgment was given for the plaintiff. Mr Kirk appeared for the plaintiff. The case Kwong Lee v Wellington Corporation and B. Cummings, claim £IOO, as damages to property caused through the overflowing of a culvert, was further adjourned till Friday next. Several witnesses were examined as to the construction of the drain and the damage done. Mr Devine appeared for the plaintiff, Mr Martin for the Corporation, and Mr Skerrett for the defendant. ' Monday, November 8. (Before Messrs Eb. Baker and J. K. Blair, V ~ ' Justices.) . DRUN KENNESS. One first offender was dealt with for this offence. Edward Turner pleaded guilty to a charge of drunkenness, and waß fined 10s, or in default 48 hours’ imprisonment. Alexander Bullock, for having been drunk and behaving in a disorderly manner on the Karori-road on Sunday, was fined £l, or in default 7 days. BY-LAW cases. Jesse Chittend and, Alfred Cooper were each fined 5s and costs for having driven round street corners at other than a walking pace. Fines were imposed upon Thomas Smith, Samuel Elliott, William Timmins, and Thomas H. Baylis for having allowed their horses to wander.. For having failed to register his cart, John Benge was fined £l, with 7s costs. William -Hollywood was fined 53, with 7s costs, for having left his carriage unattended. A charge against William, Porter, a small boy, for having let off fireworks,,was dismissed. DIRTY PREMISES. • James Roberta was summoned for having allowed nightsoil to be in the back yard of his premises, Tory-street. The Bench imposed a fine of ss, with 7s costs. Wm. M. Jacobs, for having allowed offensive rubbish to collect on his premises, Haining-street, was fined ss, with 11s costs. , DRUNKEN BEHAVIOR. Samneb Elliott was charged with having behaved in a quarrelsome manner in the Cricketers’ Arms Hotel on the Ist inst., and having refused to leave when requested by the proprietor of the hotel, Mr Jellicoe appeared ; for : the prosecution. The accused stated that he was drunk at the time, and did not know what he did. The evidence for the prosecution went to show that the accused had assaulted a person whom he met in the hotel, and altogether behaved iu a quarrelsome way. A fine of 10s, with 15s costs, was inflicted. BREACH OF THE LICENSING ACT. , James Moss, proprietor of the Karori Hotel, was charged with having sold liquor on Sunday, the 31st inst., to a child named Mary Ann Morrison. Mr Skerrett appeared for the defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Mr Skerrett admitted that the liquor was sold by the proprietor’s daughter, but he contended that the defendant was not liable unless he supplied the liquor himself. Constable Carroll deposed that he intercepted the child Morrison, and afterward went to the hotel where he saw defendant,. who admitted that the girl had got the liquor from the hotel. Moss afterward followed witness out and told him if he reported the matter he would “make it warm for him. James Moss stated that he had occasion to leave the hotel to get a nurse for his wife. He had warned his daughter not to serve anyone with drink during his absence. The child had not served in the bar before that

occasion. The case was adjourned till Wednesday morning. CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. Arthur Wilcox was charged with ill-treat-ing a horse on the 22nd ult., by working it while it was suffering from a girth gall. Constable Pennefather gave evidence that the accused was driving a horse in Willis-street on the day in question. The animal was in a wretched condition, and was galled in two places. Abraham Cass, draper, and Richard Bulkley, Secretary of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, gave corroborative evidence. The defendant stated that the horse had fallen down in Pipitea-street, and the wounds were caused by that. He drew the girth aside with a piece of rope, and was on his way home when Constable Pennefather interfered. Three witnesses gave evidence for the defence. The Bench inflicted a fine of 10s and costs, remarking that the fine would have Deen much heavier had it not been shown that the defendant had behaved kindly to the horse when it fell down. LARCENY. John McGregor was charged with having stolen a duck, value 3s, the property of W. H. Thompson, proprietor of the Albion Hotel. Defendant denied all knowledge of the duck. John Grey, kitchenman at the hotel, stated that he saw the accused enter the scullery on Sunday morning. Subsequently he missed a duck that had been hung up there along with some poultry. Met the accused, with whom he lodged, a short time after, when he (accused) said he had something"at home he wanted him to cook. McGregor then said he had sneaked a duck from the scullery. Constable Gleeson stated that when he arrested the prisoner, ha said, “ If you let me go I’ll tell you who stole the duck.” Martha Frost, cook, also gave evidence. The Bench sentenced the accused to seven days’ imprisonment. This was all the business transacted.