MAGISTRATE’S COURT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 6964, 2 November 1909, Page 6

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

MONDAY, NOVEMBER I. (Before Mr AV. G. Riddell, S.M.) SLY GROG-SELLING AT KILBIRNIE. ACCUSED FINED £2O. In giving judgment on the point raised, by Mr AVilford in the case in which William Hugbert McLaughlan was charged with ■ unlawfully selling liquor on October ICth, at Kilbirnie—that the onus lay upon the prosecution to establish that accused was an unlicensed person—his ■ Worship said it was clearly set forth in the Act that “a. person shall be deemed to be unlicensed unless at the hearing of a case ho produces his license." Mr Wilford, after consultation with his client, said that the latter had decided to on the point ‘ raised and ask a higher court tor a ruling. No evidence would be called. Accused was convicted and fined ,£2O and costs 7s. The liquor found in his possession was ordered to be confiscated. Security for appeal woe fixed at .£lO. EORTDNB-TELLBR IN TROUBLE. Mary Lyons, alias Mary Hyland, for whom Mr Wilford appeared, was charged with having undertaken to tell fortunes to , Ernest Snowt Snow was a probationary constable, and the police relied ou his evidence and that of a second probationer (tendered at a previous sitting of the court) to establish the offence. The case had been adjourned to allow of a point raised by Mr Wilford concerning the jurisdiction of the court to he determined. ' Mr Riddell how i, held that ; the proceedings were in order, the requirement of the statute that a prima facie case should be made out before, a person so accused could bo dealt with sum-

marily having been met. The accused was then ‘ called. Examined by Mr AVilford she deposed that she carried on business in the Occidental buildings, Lambton Quay. She remembered the incident referred to in the charge, hut denied that she told the man anything in reference to the future. Sho had been convicted eighteen months' previously for essaying to' foretell the future, and had since that time avoided- the practice.- ‘ AVhat she told Snow had reference to his likes and dislikes; his temperament and qualities. She had refused' to say anything about the future. ' ; To Chief-detective Broberg: She had been convicted in Sydney in January last for fortune-telling. In her previous evidence she had referred to this country only. Mr Wilford submitted that the case for the prosecution relied on an unsupported oath which was now contradicted ■ and which was capable of two interpretations. It was the duty of the court to accent such interpretation as was the more favourable to the person accused. It was admitted by the second witness that accused declined to say auylhiug .about the future. Ilia AVorship, in delivering judgment, said that there could ho no objection :to a person reading character cither by the head or by the, hand, nor did he Think- such a practice constituted an offence. But the evidence of the witness Snow showed that some of, the statements made concerned the future. Mr AVilford: There is no evidence in support save that of the accomplice. Mr Riddell said that ho could not consider the witness referred to in the light of an accomplice. His evidence embodied some slight corroboration of that of Probationer , Snow. It was purely a ouestion of oath against oath, and if Snow’s statements on the point in question were untrue he must have committed perjury from beginning to end. Accused would he convicted and fined £3, in default seven days. , , Similar charges against Clara Sinclair \rero adj oumed till Wednesday. LIQUOR TRADING ON BOARD SHIP. ’John McLean, alias John McDonald, pleaded not guilty to a charge of taking liquor; on’hoard 11.M.5.-Pioneer without the consent of the commander. Corporal Hughes, of the Paoneeiv gave evidence as to accused going on board and money passing between; him. ana a member of the ship s company. 1 Accused admitted having had liquor about ■ his person on the occasion in ; Cl 'chief-detective Broberg stated that he was asked by the commander to say that the case was not an isolated one. Further evidence having been heard, defendant was convicted and fined £3 , and 7s costs, in default fourteen days ; imprisonment. MISCELLANEOUS CASES. !

A remand 1 wasi'granted in a case , in which Alexander Moore (who pleaded not ' guilty) was charged with assaulting u illiam Evans. 7 ’ • 1 William Waiter Burgess (Mr Wilford) and Walter Oughton were each, ,cpnI vioted o£ assaulting Frank Diamond ' Burgess was fined 20s and costs 4s, and Oughton 40s and costs 4s. _ . Henry Thomas was fined 20s, in nefault seven days’, and.-£3, ;n default twenty-one days’ respectively on charges of threatening behaviour and using on-, scene language. ... - , For drunkenness and , the use of obscene language, James Armstrong was, fined ss, in’ default twenty-four hours , and ,£3, in default twenty-one days , reThomas, Plunkett was fined 20s, in default forty-eight hours, lor drunkenness. On similar charges three first offenders were each fined os, and one, who did not appear, 10s. • For stealing a bicycle, valued at A/, the property of Albert John Gourlay, Edward Lanaway -was ■ fined 40s and ordered to pay 20s to the owner, in default, seven, days’. „ , , Walter Patrick Sprowell was ordered to pay 12s per week toward the maintenance of his wife, and 8s per week towards the maintenance of . His son. first payments to be made on or before J\o-,| •vember Bth. For leaving a cart unattended, in a

public street, Thomas Harris was fined 10a and costs 7s.

, LOAVER HUTT COURT. , Civil business as under was dispossod of at yesterday’s monthly sitting of the Lower Hutt S.M. Court. Hr A. McArthur, S.M., presided. Judgment was entered for the defendant, without oostss, in the case George- Bradley (Mr McGrath) v. AValter D. Perry (Mr Bunny), claim £5 9s 9d. Judgment went for plaintiff in the, case Hutt. Valley Timber Co. v. Thoma-s A. Swnysland, claim £35 Gs 9d. costs £2 17s Gd. A case in which Harry V. AVestbury (Mr Bunny) claimed from G. Arm--are aw) XanqqseAi 'H AM. P TO Grath), an amount of £45 was adjourned. Orders were made in the following judgment summons cases:—Cornelius McManus v. Patrick Cronin, claim £9 8s; ordered to pay on or before November 15, or, in default, undergo seven days’ imprisonment. George Bradley V. Charles Laing, claim £1 5s 3d; ordered to pay on or before November 15, or undergo three ■ days imprisonment, Hutt Valley Timber Company v. H. H. Knight, claim £6 5s Gd; ordered to pay on or before November'ls, or, in do. fault, undergo seven days’ imprison ment.