MAGISTERIAL.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 8777, 12 March 1897, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

TIMARU- Friday. March 12th. (Before 0. A. Wray, Esq., S.M.) VAG. ANCY, Albert Southwood, remanded from the previous day on a charge of having insufficient lawful means of support, was called up again, R. Orwin, secretary to the Charitable Aid Board, stated that when the accused left the Home sixteen months ago, until the end of last year, he was allowed 20s per month in food and 2s 6d a week for lodging, or £1 10s lOd a month altogether. From the Ist of January his food allowance was reduced to 15s a month, because of complaints received by the Board as to his conduct. Witness had been frequently called to the Home while accused was there, to quell disturbances caused by him. James Young caretaker of the Old Men’s Home, gave evidence thataccused was an insubordinate inmate, going out without leave and coming back drunk, and saying he would go out when he liked and drink what he liked ; and when in liquor he was a nuisance, sometimes assulting the other inmates. (Accused whistled at this and witness mentioned some instances.) In consequence of his misconduct the Board gave accused a week’s notice to leave. Accused cross-examined with a view of mitigating the effect of the witness’s evidence but failed to do so. He claimed to have always been willing to assist other inmates more helpless than himself, to have done everything he was asked to do within his power, to have always asked leave to go out, and denied that he ever drank enough to affect either his head or his speech. His Worship said he preferred to believe the evidence against him, and as he could not behave himself in the Home nor behave respectably outside it, the only thing to be done was to send him to gaol as an irreclaimable vagrant. —Three months’ imprisonment. The accused was greatly distressed on hearing the sentence. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. A man named Munro was fined 20s for disorderly conduct while drunk in Stafford street the previous day. STEALING FROM THE WHARF. Two boys aged 14 and 16 pleaded guilty to a charge of stealing coals from the main wharf. Detective Livingstone stated that he saw the elder boy at 6 o'clock the previous morning carrying a bag of coal through the street, but being then engaged did not interfere with him. He saw the boy return with his bag empty, and spoke to him, when the boy admitted that he had carried home some coal from the wharf and was going back for more, and that there were others there getting coal. Witness went to the wharf and found the other accused with a sack full of coal, and more in a smaller bag. (This coal was produced in Court ; it was all large clumps.) The value of the coal was about 2s 6d. Witness did not know exactly whom it belonged to. It w r as consigned by a merchant in Lyttelton to an agent in Timaru, but whilst oh the wharf it was in the possession of the Railway Department, and the stationmaster had asked him to try and get the practice of stealing coal from the wharf put a stop to. Both boys said they picked up coal off the wharf because they saw men and boys doing it. and they thought they had a right to a share of it.

His Worship said there was no doubt something in the boys’ story that they saw others taking the coal, but that did not excuse them for doii g what was wrong. The practice of stealing coal must be stopped.—Fined 10s each. ASSAULT CASES. T. Palmer, farmer, was called up, on remand from Temuka, on charges of assaulting his wife and daughter, and of assaulting a police constable. Mr Raymond appeared for the prosecutors, and Mr White for accused.. The case had been heard at Temuka, and was adjourned for decision, and if possible arrangement between the parties. No arrangement had been made and His Worship gave his decision. At the hearing a plea of temporary insanity was put in in defence, but His Worship said no evidence had been given to support that plea, and he discussed the admissibility of such a defence, quoting authorities. The assaults were not denied, and they were not the first upon his family. Orders to find sureties would be useless, and a fine would also be useless; he must inflict such a term of imprisonment as would show him that he must not repeat such conduct,— One month’s imprisonment on each charge, concurrent; also to find two sureties in £SO each to keep the peace for six months, and to pay the costs of these charges. Accused handed a letter to His Worship, who said he would read it, and if it required any action it would be attended to.

His Worship remarked to counsel that the man had been several times examined as to his sanity, but the doctors could not certify. He would like them to see the letter the man had just handed him. Of course if the man was insane he ought to be in the asylum, not in gaol.