MAGISTERIAL.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2953, 12 September 1882, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

! ‘ TIMARU—THIS DAT. (Before J. Beswick, Esq., 8.M., and B. Elwortby, Esq.) , * DBUNKBNNEBB. A first offender was fined five shillings. ... LUNACY. - Antonio Cagliari was charged _on remand with being of unsound mind. Dr Hassall now certified that - accused was of sound mind, and he was <Jis-‘ charged. Joshua Lane was also reported upon' by Dr Hasßall as having recovered, and he was discharged with 8; caution, LUNACY ffROM DRINK. Thomas Adamson, charged on remand was discharged on payment of the .costs incurred in treating him medically. The Inspector of police intimated that an order of would be immediately applied for in his case, and His Worship stated that he would make such order. James Neil Simpson, haying recovered from the effects of drink, was discharged with a caution. BREACH Off THB LICENSING ACT. His Worship now gave judgment in the case against Messrs Tayior and Bowie for selling spirits without being duly licensed. His Worship said he found the defendants had committed a breach ofthe law in that having obtained from the Collector of Customs provisional license, . (which provisional license became invalid oa the coming into force of the “Licensing Act, 1881,”) they did not apply for a license under the new Act, as they should have done. A breach had, it was clear, been committed, but this being a test case, a fine of forty shillings would bo inflicted. OBTAINING GOODS UNDUE FALSE ’ 'PRETENCES.

Bridget Leonard Byan was charged, on remand, with obtaining goods under false pretences from Messrs Wood and Smith, drapers, to the amount of £l7 16s 4d. Mr Jameson appeared for the prosecutor, and Mr H, L. Foster for the accused. Before the case was proceeded with, Mr Poster applied for restitution of the sum of £3OO found on accused’s E arson when she was arrested, that sum aving nothing to do with the case. His Worship took note of the application and the case was proceeded with. , ‘ , The following evidence was taken for tb* twoMcuiaon :■—

posed that his firm - had two establishments in Timaru, one (the branch) btiing under the management of pne Thomas Timmonda who had no discretionary power as to granting credit. He had to consult the firm before disposing of goods on credit. He did so in the case of Mrs Ryan who applied for credit. Timmonds was instructed to supply her with goods on credit. Witness saw accused afterwards in thp main shop. ■ , . ~ To Mr H. L. Foster—Part of the goods (subject of this charge) were got at the branch shop ; the amount of these : is £8 16a 3d as per list I produce. The balance were got afc the chief shop, on August 16 of this year. I entered the goods to Mrs Ryan, not to her husband. We usually enter goods to a wife. I understood the husband and wife together had bought a farm at the Washdyko. The goods got were carpet bags, clothing, hosiery, &o. The account has never been presented for payment. Counsel here submitted that there should have been an account before the Court. His Worship said he was of the same opinion. , , , , . To His Worship— Accused had asked for no account to be sent her till the end of the month. , : • Cross-examination continued Her husband, I believe, has left no property behind. , I,only know from my manager that she asked for credit on certain representations. Thomas Timmonds, manager of Messrs Wood and Smith’s branch, said he had to acquaint the firm with any case of credit before granting it. The branch; business was usually a cash one.' He remembered Mrs Ryan’s visit. She . said she wanted to buy some goods on credit. He asked her questions as to her position, She said they had bought a farm at Washdyko, and he under-; stood from her that it was paid for. j The goods (enumerated) were supplied : by witness. He spoke to the firm and; told them of Mrs Ryan’s position as | represented by her. But for her state-' ment, witness would not have supplied; the goods. ■ i To Mr Foster—l know nothing of the hnsband or of any note given me. It is not true that any note was given me from the hnsband. She was promised a month’s credit. I told, her on Saturday I would apply to the firm to withdraw the information (if the police would), provided she paid the money. She sent for me while she was at the gaol, and asked me to move in her favor. I asked Inspector Pender for tho money, saying that Mrs Ryan was willing to pay it. This was asked by. me, at Mrs Ryan’s request. Alexander Ferguson, manager of the National Bank, Timaru, said he knew accused and her husband. In February last they came to the Bank and open«n an account with £3OO in the name of Patrick Ryan. The money was paid in in gold. They both said they liked this part of the country and meantto settle here. .Mrs Ryan was always present when lie had interviews. The husband Had a.current’account until sth August, when he overdrew by some £2B, on which witness sent him notice.

Mr Foster interjected that he' had been / watching for some sign of obtaining goods under false pretences, but this evidence was irrelevant.

Mr Jameson said this evidence would assist in the proof of the charge. Evidence continued—On September 4 a bill for the husband was presented by Maclean and Stewart of £2OO, and witness saw accused in a railway carriage at one o'clock in the afternoon. It was the Dunedin express. He spoke to accused, at which she appeared very confused. He asked why her husband did not meet his bills, and by his neglect ruin his credit. She said|_“i£ you keep it quiet for a few days it will be all right.” ‘ Witness asked her how she left her farm and house, to which she replied that she had her keys in her pocket.' Witness did not meefthe bill. Louis Pepperill, salesman to Wood and Smith, remembered supplying accused with certain goods. It is customary for every salesman to enter such sales as may not bo for cash. He sold to accused on August 18 the goods specified in the book produced for 16s 2d.

Po Mr Foster —I never saw Mrs Ryan, before then, nor did I ever see her afterwards till to-day. The goods then purchased I consider necessary. I consider embroidery necessary. I asked Mr Smith about her having credit and he said it was all right, as »he had an account there.

John Poden, salesman to Wood and Smith, said he recognised accused. She bought goods from witness on September 4, amountimg to £1 11s. He gave her credit because on being’ .referred, to, Mr Smith instructed him that she bad an account at the shop. Maria Paul,.employed at Wood and Smith’s, said she the accused 1 to whom she sold certain goods in August, on credit. The entries (produced) were made by witness. She was supplied bn credit because she was brought upstairs, by a member of. the firm, Mr Wood. James Wood, a member of the firm of Wood andSmith,recognised the accused, who came to bis shop'in August last, brought there by Mr Timmonds. He introduced her to witness as the dealer’s wife at Washdyke. She said’ she •wanted certain goods and to have them entered. Witness took her to the last witness to obtain what she required Nothing was said to witness beyond the introduction.

James Adam, clerk/fo Mr W- Ziesler, said be knew the aiocused. The document produced purports to be a memorandum of lease agreement of certain land at Washdyke., No money or rent has been paid on this land, though over £IOO is due. This was the case fop the prosecution. For the defence Mr Poster contended (I.) that accused was a married woman under the control of her husband; (2) that the goods were’ necessaries ; (3) the month’s credit asked for was not yet expired ; (4) there was nothing to show that she would not have paid for them ; (5) she and her fiunily had actually used the goods for the ordinary purposes of life ; (6) the manager had produced no evidence of false pretence. He finally contended that these proceedings had been taken for mere debt collecting, and asked the Bench to dismiss the case. The Bench said there was no evidence of false pretence, and the case could hot he sent for trial. The accused would be dismissed. CIVIL cases. In the following cases judgment fras given for plaintiffs, by defanlt, with costs; —R. Turnbull v. Gr. F. Allen, claim £8 12s 6d ; W. Townsend v. T. Bruce, claim £1 Is Id ; Alfred Stone v, G. Durham, claim £6 9s 6d ; A. Spalding v. J'. Eae, claim £23 12s fid; Creditors’ Trustee of J. M. Shepherd v. W. Parsons,- £52 2s 3d ; P. Macintyre v, F. Egan, claim £5 5s ; James Bing v. A. C. Fergusson, claim £24 7s fid. _ W. Hislop v, Albert Mason, claim £lO 8s 3d, The wife of defendant appeared to challenge the correctness of one or two items of the account. After hearing both sides, the Bench gave judgment for plaintiff for amonot

White and another y. E. H. Lough (as Trustee under the will of A. F. Anderson, deceased), claim £9B 13 lid. Mr Jameson for plaintiffs. The defendant attended, to state that he wished judgment to be recorded, and the Bench accordingly gave judgment for plaintiffs, with costs. ; J. Shepherd v. G. P. Roberts, claim £3 la. Judgment was given > for plaintiff for amount claimed, with costs. Wildie, Allan and Stumbles v. Alex. Bennett, claim £—— Mr White for. plaintiffs. For the plaintiffs Mr Joshua Ralph deposed to the amount being due. In reply to His Worship, defendant saidhe did not dispute the account, bn I Mr Wildie, a member of the late firm, owed him money. ‘ His Worship gave judgment for plaintiffs, with costs, directing defendant to take separate action against the individual. member of the firm who was indebted to him.