RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Oamaru Mail, Volume II, Issue 490, 23 November 1877, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

* THIS DAY. (Refore T. W. I'ahkkh, Km 1 ., lt.M.) sia'-uuou kum.inu. Henry Hewitt was charged vvif.li having, <iii the: 17th November, sold one bottle of porter to one George Matthews, contrary lo the provisions of the Licensing Act. The defendant pleaded Not, miilly. !Mr. O'iMearlier iij>]n':irc<l for the prosocution. llestattdlhat notw itl.standing tie numerous thus that had bet n inllicted for the aliove oll't nee, (lie illegal traffic was carried on as fretly as ever, and lie had no hesitation in asserting that as much drnk was sold in this way as l>y 1 caused hou-es. G.or,'e Mitlhews, revenue constable, deposed that, on ill.: 17ih No\v ip.'>i>v, ho ,-ir d two ot'i• rs went to 1 lewilt,':<, oyster s loon. Defendant was pr, sent. Ho adi,'d for .some oysters ami for something i<> .li-.iik. IK: or lere.l a 1.0ii.10 of poller, u Inn, had yiveii no money at the lime. -fl Defend nit took ilie porter from the back of the im mi in whie ihe (.vitiies.H) and thu I .it''cr in n were silt in;-;. Cross-examined liy defendant : II.: did not s-e d iVndaiit leave the sdoon to fetc'i the porter. This was the case for I lie prosecution. Henry Hewitt slated that the last witness lad half ji sovereign on the counter, and would positively swear that he received the money before lie procured the beer. Cross-examined by Mr. (VMearlier : He declined to stat.; where he got tho bollie <>f port. r. His Wois'iip, after eommeni in;,' on the evidence at, some length, said that, taking into consideration it was the lirst time tho defendant, had appeir. d before the Court, he should fei 1 iiielined to mak •: tho lino as be..it as poss'in].; ;at the same time, sin tiler flies previously intliel.ed having pi-ov, d inell' ctnal in ]U'vious cues, ho would impose a p. naliy ot I'J). ANoriu::: cash. Margaret Seott wasc larked with having, oil t I! lTtil November, sold to (..■ol'„'« Matt e.vs two ul.isse.s of beer, Ha'» belli <; lie us, d so to do. Mr. r app.-a.-od for I he prosecution. Tim defendant admitted fiat slio did sell " t'.at man " (pointnu lo the plaiut If) two "las-n s of be ■!' ; but sud ho l.avo had pi iH v for uot.iiirjj Uad ho •in* into i!.e oin.ng-ionui. Defend ml | pleaded Guilty. His Woi'.s liji slid that (akin ; into om-sitb-ration the nature of the cane Hie lino imposed would be LI 8. A TllliU' «'A V.. Clias. Murphy wis char;,; d with sdling t'iree asses of whisky on tle 18-.li November, lo fiuiii','! M.ut.ieus, eou.rary to tho Licensor/ Act. Mr. O'Me.cjher app. ared for the prosoenion. D-fen hint pleaded Guilty, but wished to mako a statement. II: said that on % the 18t i instant, the plaintiff and a man called at his house, complained of It intf wi arv, ami a ked for a yhiss of something to dr n!<. He told them he had nul.hiu'.{ to H.d. He had put chased a buttle of whisky for himseif, and mi beiny pivHSod, let them have two glass and ho hud onu with them. ilis Worsln'ii said the revenue had suffered veiy much lately, and if tho revonno was defrauded, the people were defrauded also. Ho would impose a line of L2O. AN ADJorUNKI) CASIO. IJachael Grace was charged with having on the 17t i November s dd three glasses of whisky to one IJeniy Andrews, without a lieens •. Mr. U'Mcayhcr appeared for the proHo- , tion. Tho defendant plead--d Not guilty. Mr. U'.Me.iLfher asked for an ndjournino.it as a witness had to bo subpoenaed to jjive evidenc ■. The «li fondant tint t-ni) c/iho miyht bo hoard to-morrow as h'ii> wanted ti visit lor daughter, why was very ill, at tho Uo o 'buni.

The case was adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow morning. BEER OK BREAD AND CHEESE. John Cogvin, boarding-house keeper of Thames-street, was charged with Laving, .011 the 13th inst., sold one glass of brandy and one glass of !<eer, to one Henry Andrews, while not licensed to sell alcoholic liquors. Mr. O'Meaglier appeared for the prosecution. Defendant said he did not I:now any person named JJenry Andrews, and would plead Not guilty until lie heard the evidence. Mr. O'Meaglier said that probably when the defendant saw the witness in the box, and heard the evidence, lie would then withdraw the plea, and substitute a plea of guihy. Henry Andrews deposed that lie was a revenue constable, anel knew the defendant. He was in his house on the 13ch inst., and had tea there. He then went into the sitting-room and got into convusitioii with a man who was boarding there, and who challenged him (witness) to play a game of cards for two drinks. lie played, and lost the game. Defendant was in the tame ro >m placing with another part}'. After they had finished their game, all four of them went into the bar. The man with whom lie (.vitn.-ss) had been playing had a glass of beer, and witness had a glass of brandy. Defendant poured out the drinks and left tin in on the counter. Cogvin then hf t the room, and on his returning witness gave him Is. for the two drinks. Cogv'.n had a plate of I read and cheese in his hand, which le phiced on the counter. Witness had not o'den-d any bread and cheese. The defendant here applied for an adjournment. Mr O'Meaglier opposed the application, and called attention to the fact that the defendant had already stated he had no witnesses. His Worship declined to grant the adjournment. The witness continued, and said he did not tat any of the bread and cheese. He paid the Is. for drinks. The brandy was taken from a bottle, and the beer was drawn from an engine. Defendant to witness : Did I not tell you that I would not sell you the liquor, but would sell you the bread and cheese ? Witness : 2so. His Worship remarked that it did not matter whether or not the defendant had sold the bread and cheese. That was merely a subterfuge, for which the law provided. The defendant, having been sworn, stated that he had served the last witness for two drinks, but it w;is for the bread iiV.C? cheese that he had taken the money, lb.- had lo'd Andrews that he would not i;;Ku ilr- money for di inks. Cross-examine d by Mr. O'Meaglier: He had playtd for bread and cheese. He would not swear it was not for drinks. His Worship lined the defendant L3O. remarking that it was perfectly evident that he had laid himself out to sell liquor.. The defendant gave notice of appeal. AND VET ANOTHER CASE. William Bank was charged with having so'dalottle of porter, without havim: a license, to Htmy Andrews on the 17ti: inst. The defendant pleaded Guilty, and was fined L2O.