RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 849, 8 June 1888, Page 22

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

At the Resident Magistrate’s Court last Friday, before Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., a first offender for drunkenness was fined os and 2s cab hire, or ia default 24 hoars’ imprisonment. His Worship decided to make no order in the adjourned case against Henry Underwood, who was charged with failing to support his brother, as the latter had failed to produce evidence that he was unable to work. The charges against William Cranford and William Will, employes of the ’Bus Company, of having obstructed the tramway, were further adjourned, the former until the Bth and the latter until the 11th instant.

At the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Saturday, before Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., Mrs Francis Townsend, licensee of the Ship Hotel, was charged with having permitted gambling to take place in her house on the 29th May. Evidence was given to the effect that on the date in'question several persons were in the hotel playing a game called “Yankee Grab’ for money and drinks. Mr Bunny, for the defence, raised a point that the police had not complied with the provisions of the Act, as they had not called upon the defendant to produce her license for endorsement in the event of a conviction being obtained. His Worship reserved judgment until next morning. A young man named John McCarthy, employed at the Waverley Hotel, was charged with having stolen £5 from George Clarke, a fellow-servant. Chief Detective Browne stated that he believed ’ the theft was the result of drink, and he would have no objection to tbe accused being dealt with under the First Offenders Probation Act. , His Worship adjourned the case until Tuesday in order that the Probation Officer might present a report on the case. Matilda Blue and Mary Joues, charged with drunkenness, were each fined'los, or in default, 24 hours’imprisonment. Another offender for drunkenness, who did not appear in answer to his bail, was fined ss, or in default, six hours’ imprisonment. Annie Bussell, charged with using obscene language in Frasers-lane, was sentenced to 48 hours’ imprisonment. Constable Brown, of Wanganui, brought down on Monday William Billings sentenced at Bulls to three mouths’ imprisonment for obscenity. The constable also brought down Mrs Cooper, of Hunterville, sent to the lunatic asylum. On Monday morning Mr H. W. Robinson gave judgment in the case against Mm Townsend, of the Ship Hotel, who was charged with a breach of the Licensing Act. His Worship said that after he had considered the arguments for the defence, he held that the case was one in whioh there was necessarily some connivance on the part of the defendant. In imposing a penalty, however, he would take .into account the openness of the accused in the matter—that is, in allowing what, she considered a harmless practice to ba c-i.rr.ed on openly in the bar, and would, therefore inflict a flue of £l, the minimum fine allowed in such a case, and costs £1 3s. Two prisoners, named George Gray and Peter Mullen, who were sentenced to a month’s imprisonment each at

being illegally on premises, were brought down by Monday evening’s train in charge of Constable O’Connor of Masterton. They were ait onoe conveyed to'the Terrace Gaol. The charge against Johu Pomeroy, alias William Collins, of forging and uttering four cheques on the 26th- May, was called at the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Monday morning, and in consideration of the pressure of business the hearing of it was postponed till next morning,'at the request of Chief-Detective Browne. . A first offender for drunkenness, who was

also charged ’with causing a disturbance in Willis-st'reet on Sunday evening last, was brought before Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., on Monday morning, and fined 20s, or in default'4B hours’ imprisonment. Judgment for plaintiffs with costa was given in the following civil cases by Mr B. W. Uobinson,R.M. onTuesday T. Follas v llobertCrofts, 18s Sd, and coat’s 6s ; J. M. May v Alexander Bullock, 14s, and costs 7s; F. Cooper v E. Stratford, £.9 Os lid, and costs lls ; W. M. Baunatyne and Co. v -W. B. Archer, 9s 9d, and costs 10s ; M. Bohan v William Dunne, £5, and costs £1 ; W. B. Crawford v J. Thompson and R. H. Elliott, £47 14s Id, and costs £1 17s ; J. and R. Sloan vH. E Joms, £S 2s,' and costs 10s ; - B Blower v F. .W. Good, £2 15a 6d, and costs 7s ; Green and Co. v 11. Walker, £1 10s, and costs 6s; T. B. Jacobson vC. McKirdy, £7 2s, and costs 10s y B. Blower v D. CameroD, £l, and cost 3 6a. The case of R. Hannah and Co. v Trustees in the estate of Karaitiana Takauroane, claim £lO 14s, waa adjourned for evidence to be taken at Gisborne. Judgment for the defendant was given in the case McKenna v Eckford, claim £2O. " A'.

Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., presided at the sitting of the Resident Magistrate’s Court onTuesday morning. .Patrick Sullivan was charged with having committed wilful damage to a tramcar on the previous evening. Constable Seymour stated that the accused had deliberately put hi.s fist through the window of one of the carriages as the tram was passing along Cambridge-avonue on the previous evening. His Worship im posed a tine of £l, and ordered the accused to pay the amount of the damage (3s), or in default three days’ imprisonment. John McCarthy, the young man 'who was remanded from last Saturday on . a charge of larceny, in order that the Probation Officer might report on the case, was again brought up. His Worship said the report was a favorable one, and he had decided to place the accused under the provisions of the First Offenders Act for a term of six months, within which time he would have to return the £5 be had admitted having taken from a fellow servant at the Waverley Hotel. Messrs A. W. Brown, Le Grand Campbell and Colonel Butts, J P.’s, presided at the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Wednesday morning. For drunkenness, Mary Murray, alias McMullins, and Daniel Davies were fined 20s ' and/.costa, or in default 4S hours’" imprisonment. A sentence of three months' imprisonment was imposed *n one John Igoe, against whom a charge of vagrancy was preferred. Robert Olley, who pleaded guilty to having allowed two horses to wander at large in Sussexsquare on the 24th instant, was fined Is, and 3s costs.

The squabbles of several Italian fishermen occupied the attention of the Resident Magistrate’s Court on Weduesday, Messrs A. Le Grand Campbell and A. W. Brownj J.P.’s, occupying the Bench. Two charges of assault' were preferred against one William Thomas, alias Taff, on one Cezare Perotti, and the other on Elizabeth Perotti, his wife. The c mplainants also asked that the defendant Rhould be bound over to keep the peace. The first charge was dismissed, and for the latter charge a fine of os and costs was inflicted. A similar' charge which was preferred against Arestidemo Frandi was also dismissed. MrDeviue appeared for the complainants. The charges of forgery against John Pomeroy, alias William Collins, wherein he was charged, with having on the 26th May forced and uttered two cheques, one for £4 and the other for £4 10s, both of which were purported to have been signed bv Andrew Young, and also with having passed a valueless cheque for £4, to which the name Daniel Cronin was signed, were heard at the Resident Magistrate’s Court Wednesday. Messrs A. W. Brown, A. Le Grand Campbell, and Colonel Butts were the presiding Justices. The evidence of James Henderson, an employe of the Wellington Meat Company, to whom the cheque for £4 10s was tendered in payment for meat purchased by the accused, was taken, also that of Mr Andrew Young, who swore that he gave no authority to the defendant to sign his name, also that the signature on the cheque did not resemble that of either himself or his son. William H. Galway, accountant of tho Bank of New South Wales, deposed that the cheque had been presented at the Bank and returned marked “no account.” Detective Campbell deposed to having, on the 31st ult., arrested the defendant at Newtown. This concluded the evidence for the prosecution, and the defendant was committed for trial on both charges. A further charge of having forged the name of Andrew Young to another cheque for £5 10s is pending against the accused.

SHEBP-STBALING CASE. At the R.M. Court - last Friday, Richard Smith, a well-known resident of Pauatahanui, was charged before Mr H. W. Robinson, R.M., with having, some time between the months of March, 1887, and May, 1888, stolen 68 sheep, the property of Mr James Macmauamen, a settler of Terawhiti. ,‘Mr Gully conducted the prosecution, and Mr Menteath, assisted by Mr Jones, appeared for the defence. In opening, Mr Gully stated that during last October Mr Macmanamen, had missed about 1000 sheep from his run at Terawhiti, and on the 21st of last month Detective Chrystal, from information received, had proceeded to the accused’s land, and there the complainant identified 68 sheep as being part of those stolen. The animals were identified' by the registered ear-mark. He said- the case would turn on the identification of the animals, and Jig. asked, if a prima facie case was jnadg

out, that the accused should be committed for trial. The first witness called was Richard Evatt, Acting Registrar in the Brands Registration Office, who produced the registered brands of both the accused and complainant. Mr Macmanamen’s registered earmark consisted of a slit down the centre of the left ear and the tip off the right one. The accused’s earmark was a slit down the right ear. Was not aware that the accused had altered his brand to one similar to Mr Macmanamen’s. Detective Chrystal deposed that on the 21st of last month he saw the accused on the Pare-mata-road. Witness informed Smith that he had a warrant to search his land, as he (Chrystal) had been informed that a number of sheep which had been stolen from Macmanamen’s run at Terawhiti had been seen on his land. The accused said it was no use visiting the land ns he had no sheep there. Any sheep he had were on his brothers’ (Joseph or Tom) land. Accused declined to assist in the search. Witness subsequently went to the accused’s land, and with the assistance of James Macmanamen and others he musteied the accused’s sheep, and a number of them were identified as some nf those missing. Saw the accused next day, when he told him the result of his visit. Smith said the earmark found on the'sheep had been registered by him for more than 20 years. He informed witness that the earmark of his sheep was a tip off the right oar and a slit down the left ear, and he gave witness a diagram of these brands. Subsequently, witness showed the accused a copy of a telegram he had received from Wellington giving the registered earmark of the accused’s sheep, and then he (the accused) said that he knew that his sheep had a slit in one ear or the other, and he also said that it was likely that the ears had been tipped when he bought them in the Wairarapa. Afterward, referring to the same animals, the accused said he had reared the whole of them himself. By Mr Jones ; There were about 200 sheep beside the 68 taken from accused’s land. Was informed by Mr Macmanamen in the presence of the accused that one sheep identified 'as stolen had been found on Mr Joseph Smith’s land. The accused did not object to witness searching the land, bnt he would not assist. Accused wanted the search pub off until next day, but witness refused. James Macmanamen, sheepfarmer, deposed that he owned about 8000 sheep on a run at Terawhiti. In October of last year about 1000 of his sheep were missing. The witness also gave evidence to being present at the accused’s place when the sheep were mustered, and to identifying 68 of them as his. The fleece brand was not visible,'’having been taken off at the last shearing. He had not the slightest doubt that the sheep were his, but he could not identify them except by the earmark. They were similar in appearance -to those stolen, and he felt certain they were his. In cross - examination, the witness stated that he was not aware that there were sheep at Wainui-o-mata having the same earmark ias his sheep. It would be possible to drive sheep from his run to Horokiwi Yalley, where the accused lived, without being seen. Re-examined by Mr Gully: Although there were plenty of crossbred Romney Marsh sheep between Wellington and Wanganui, it did not necessarily follow that they were similar to his. No two flocks, although they might be of the same breed, were exactly alike. Had not sold any of his sheep to sheepbreeders for about five years. John McManaway, shepherd, in the employ of the prosecutor, stated that on the 21st May last he visited the accused’s place at Horokiwi Yalley, and helped to muster his (accused’s) sheep. From the muster witness helped to draft out 68 sheep which witness believed belonged to Mr Macmanamen. They were the same class of sheep, and were marked in the same manner as Mr Macmanamen’s. By Mr Menteath : Witness had seen the sheep as he passed in the accused’s paddock about a fortnight previous to mustering. Jerry Harrington, a shepherd in the employ of Mr Wright, of Island Bay, corroborated the statements of the last witness, he having also assisted at the mustering of the 68 sheep on the accused’s property. Thomas Macmanamen, brother of the plaintiff, had inspected the sheep which had been mustered and yarded on the accused’s land, and had found that they bore the Terawhiti brand, and belonged to witness’ own station. They missed the sheep off the run at shearing time, last October. About 1000 sheep were then missed. Witness did not count the sheep when they mustered at shearing time. It would take a day and a half to take a mob of sheep from Terawhiti station to the accused’s property. Alex. Ure, a shepherd formerly employed on the Terawhiti station, and for the last three years on Mr Wright’s station, Island Bay, stated that he was present at and inspected 68 sheep at Pauatahanui which had been mustered on the accused’s property. The sheep were the same class as those on the Terawhiti station. They were earmarked the same as the Terawhiti sheep, and were the samesize.; Witness thought that if these sheep were placed amongst the Terawhiti flocks they could not be recognised. He also examined some sheep belonging to the accused, and they were not of the same class. At this stage the case was adjourned till 9.30 the next Monday morning- j.

THE DEFENDANT DISCHARGED. Tlip hearing pf the charge of sheep

stealing was resumed before Mr H. W, Robinson, R.M:, on Monday. Mr Gully, for the prosecution, and Mr Menteath and with- him Mr Jones, for the defence, were again present. Constable Charles Slight. deposed that he assisted Mr James Macmanamen to muster a number of sheep on Mr Smith’s property on the 21st of May, and from these about"?2j>' sheep were drafted and yarcled at the police station, Pauatahanui. These were-ulaimed by Mr Macmanamen. These sheep were, inspected by several parties from "Mr-Macmanamen’s and the adjoining runs. Witness had "had some experience in sheep, and he would say that the drafted were two and four-tooth wethers. Defendant told witness and Detective Chrystal, who was with him, that he had bred the sheep that were drafted out. Detective Chrystal got a telegram, which he read before defendant, and when be came to the part which said that the defendant’s mark was a cut on the right ear, the defendant said he knew his mark was n cut on the oar, but be had forgotten which one. By Mr Menteath : There were about eight or ten different earmarks amongst tho flock from which these sheep had been drafted.

Nicholas Abbott, a sheep-farmer residing near the accused, deposed that he had bought some sheep from the defendant. He was not acquainted with the defendant’s stock, and did not know the earmark on his stock' The earmark on 60 of those which lie bought was a slit on the left ear. He bought them about three years ago. James Cook, shearer, in the employ of Mr Blackie, a neighboring farmer of the defendant’s, had noticed the earmark on the defendant’s sheep. He did not remember observing the tip off the left ear. Witness had been three years in his present employ. George Robert Cornford, a shepherd in the employ of James Macmanamen, visited the police station, Pauatahanui, on the 28th May to inspect some sheep that were penned there. The sheep were wethers. He noticed the earmark. The sheep were his employers. By Mr Menteath : The earmark led him to form the opinion that they belonged to his employers. By Mi Gully Y'Another reason why he thought they belonged to Mr Macmanamen was that they were the same sort of sheep. By Mr Menteath : Mr Macamanaraen’s sheep were Romney Marsh. This closed the case for the, prosecution. Mr Menteath, addressing the Court at considerable length, submitted that a prima facie case had.- not been made out. There was no proof that any sheep had been stolen. lii'Macmauamen’s evidence there was merely the fact that at the annual muster some sheep were missing that could not be accounted for. There was absolutely .no evidence to show that any sheep had been stolen by any person. The only, case that the prosecution had attempted to make out was that 1000 sheep were missing. A reward had been offered for the detection of the thief, and then a shepherd in the employ of the plaintiffs came forward and said he had noticed a similarity between certain sheep' on the defendant’s property and those of his employer. This was the only link which had been set up. Mr Menteath cited several cases in support of his contention. He stated the intention of the defence, in the event of a committal, to produce an overwhelming mass of evidence,.but hoped that it would not be necessary. , His Worship ruled that there was sufficient presumption to warrant him in sending the case for trial, and Mr Menteath therefore called evidence in rebuttal.

George Jones, farmer, residing at Horokiwi ; John Cassell, farm laborer; John Mitchell, farmer, Porirua ; John Mitchell, farmer, Horokiwi ; William Mitchell, sheep-farmer, Wairarapa ; William Jones, farmer, Horokiwi ; and Joseph Greensmith, farm laborer, were called. The evidence of these witnesses went to show that the earmark on the sheep claimed by the plaintiff was used for the past three years by the defendant.

John Cassell, swore that in 1886 he assisted the defendant to earmark some of the sheep in question. William. Mitchell deposed that the sheep claimed by tlie/plamtiff were bred on his land in the Wairarapa, and originally came from Mr Bid well’s station. The other witnesses swore that the sheep which had been drafted out were the same as those at present on the defendant’s property. His Worship decided to dismiss the charge, as lie ruled that, if he were to send the defendant for trial on the evidence submitted to him, any settler might be put in the same position, there being only suspicion to go upon. He therefore dismissed the case.