MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Southland Times, Issue 19518, 18 May 1922, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

YESTERDAY’S BUSINESS. AN ALL DAY SITTING. An all day sitting of the Invercargill Magistrate’s Court was held yesterday, the Court being fully occupied from 10 a.m. till close on 6 o’clock. Mr G. Cruickshank,. S.M., was on the bench. DOUGH, BANKNOTES AND BLUDGEON. A tallish, pale faced young man answered to the name of William Vinko Adams, against whom the following charges were preferred:—That he was deemed to be a rogue and a vagabond in that he did have in his possession without lawful excuse an implement of house-breaking, namely a picklock key; that he wilfully destroyed goods in the process of manufacture, namely a batch of bread, valued at £ll ss, the property of George Champion; that he broke and entered the place of the last named on April 1 and committed mischief. Mr Reed appeared for the accused and acting-Detective Lean conducted the case. George John Champion, bake? residing at Tramway road, said that on the night of April 30 he made up the dough for the next day. When it was baked in the morning i|t went dead. Witness identified a sample produced in Court. He had the bread analysed and it was found to contain washing soda. The place had been locked up securely the night before. The accused had been in his employ for about eighteen months or two years and he had been discharged by witness in March last. He had had complaints about the bread previously, it being said to be salty. By Mr Reed: The accused was a very good worker and there had been no unpleasantness between them as far as he was aware. Acting-Detective Lean said, that he interviewed the accused on. May 10 and in his room had found the two jugs produced, both containing dregs of washing soda. The accused admitted that they had been full of this substance and that he had taken them to Mr Champion’s bakery on April 1 and mixed the contents with the dough between twelve midnight and one in the morning. In his room was also found a tin the contents of which he said he was going to mix with the dough at Mr Champion’s later. The picklock accused admitted using to effect an entrance into Mr Champion’s premises. The cartridges, electric torch and bludgeon produced were also found in his house. At this stage his Worship expressed a desire to see the bludgeon and a formidable looking implement consisting of a six inch long iron pipe fitted into a length of heavy rubber tubing was handed up to the bench. “Which is the business end,” asked his Worship, as he examined the weapon critically. “The heavy end, I suppose,” said the detective, “but I should say either end would do,” he added amidst laughter. A statement had been made by the accused describing how he had mixed up the concoctions mentioned and had gained admission to the bakehouse. \... Br Mr Reed: The accused had been very frank about the matter and had given them every assistance. The accused pleaded guilty and was committed to the Supreme Court for sentence. Further charges were preferred as follows: Breaking and entering the dwelling house of Richard Foley by day on or about April 17, and with stealing from it £46; breaking and entering the house of William Stanley Lindsay by day on or about April 17 and stealing from it £1 10s; breaking and entering the house of Edward Gardiner on or about April 15 and stealing from it £9; breaking and entering the house of Alexander Daniel Patterson on or about April 26 and stealing from it £4 15s; breaking and entering the house of Elies Joseph Cowley on April 28 and stealing from it £4. /

Acting-Detective Lean said that on May 11 he received a signed statement from the accused in which he described how he had effected entrances to the houses mentioned in" the informations and had taken the money. As a result of a search at the Estuary, where the accused said he had thrown in the money when he saw the detective in the vicinity of his house, £6l in notes was recovered. Since then £2 10s in gold had been found in a boot in a shed and other minor articles. By Mr Reed: Accused had given them every assistance to clear up the maters. The evidence of various witnesses concerning the disappearance of the sums of moneys was also taken. The accused pleaded guilty to all the charges and was committed to the Supreme Court for sentence. THEFT. “A case of putting his head into the lion’s den,” said Acting-Detective Lean, referring to the arrest of a young man named Ransome Charles Fairweather, who pleaded guilty to the following offences:—Theft on April 1 of one lady’s gold watch valued at £2 10/-, the property of Frank Holloway; theft on April 27 of two gold rings valued at £9, the property of Frank Holloway; theft on April 27 of one lady’s silver Elgin watch valued at £2 10/-, the property of William Lynch and James Paskcll; and theft of one pipe valued at 12/6 the property of J. R. McKenzie. The detective went on to say that the accused had gone into the Police Station about a certain matter one day, and while he was there Constable Austin noticed a ring on his finger which appeared to be similar to one that had been reported as stolen. The accused was interrogated and searched and other articles were found on him. “He couldn’t give any explanation of the thefts,” said the detective, “beyond saying he had to do it. It seems to me,” he continued, “that it is the case of a kleptomaniac.” Mr Reed said that the accused was only twenty years of age and his parents were very respectable people in the Kennington district. During the past three months he had been drinking heavily and coming to town had got into bad company, with the result that he had been playing fast and loose. The only excuse he could make for the thefts was that one the day in question he had been ’‘drinking. Previous to the period mentioned accused’s conduct had been exemplary. Mr Reed submitted that it was a case for probation and if this was granted the accused undertook to go back to his father’s farm and to take out a prohibition order against himself. Acting-Detective Lean said that the accused did not seem to be all he might be mentally. He should be put under the strictest supervision. Mr McLean, probation officer, said that he recommended that the accused should be placed under strict control, which could not be done if he were placed on probation. His Worship eaid he thought a term of imprisonment was required. Accused would be sentenced to a term of - reformative treatment not exceeding one year. ALLEGED THEFT OF BICYCLE. Henry Eric Mills was charged with stealing a bicycle valued at £B, the property of Henry G. Blomfield, on March 27. Mr Raines appeared for the accused and Inspector Dewe conducted the prosecution. Henry G. Blomfield said he left the bicycle outside Buckingham’s grocery shop at Avenal. He last saw it at about 6.45 p.m. A few minutes after when he went to look for it it waS>- missing. At about 4 o’clock next day he saw someone riding it in Dee street. He stopped the man riding it and was told that the man got it off a man called Clark. The man, who was the accused, said his own had gone missing, and the one he was riding was given him by Clark. Witness gave details of alterations that had been made to the bicycle. Constable Austin said that the accused made a statement stating that his own bicycle had ben stolen and he told a man named Clark, whom he met at a dance,, about, it. Later Clark lent him the bicycle produced ifK Court. He had not seen Clark before the affair and could not trace him since. Constable Austin said that inquiries made by the police had failed to locate the man Clark.

Mr Raines traversed at length the evidence adduced by the police, and submitted that a case sufficient to send the accused to the Supreme Court for trial had not been made out. He submitted that the case should be dismissed. His Worship decided, however, to hear the evidence for the defence. After hearing the evidence, his Worship said that in a case like that the onus was on the defendant. He thought it was clearly a case for a jury to say whether or not the defendant had stolen the bicycle. He was not sufficiently satisfied with the explanation given concerning the bicycle to justify him in dismissing the case. Defendant would be committed for trial at the next sitting of the Supreme Court. Bail was allowed in one surety of £5O. MISCELLANEOUS CASES. John Sievwright, who did not appear to answer a charge of disorderly behaviour while drunk, was convicted and fined £l, and costs 7/-. Two charges of riding on the footpath cost David A. R. Murch a fine of £l, costs 7/-. John Ruskin Howie, for failing to keep on his lefthand side when turning round a corner in a motor car, was convicted and ordered to pay costs 7/-. John Tall, charged with driving a car without a license, with plying for hire without holding a license, and with failing to have distinguishable marks of identification on the car, was convicted and fined £1 with 7/- costs on the second charge and convicted and discharged on the others. The second and third charges in the previous case were preferred against George F. McQuarrie, who was convicted and fined £l, with 7/- costs, on the third charge and the other was dismissed.

“The machine was apparently full out,” said Constable Fulton, in describing how Thomas Ryder had driven a motor bicycle along the North road. It was a bad case, said the constable. The defendant said his bicycle could not go faster than twenty miles an hour. His Worship, after hearing the evidence, took the view that the defendant was going too fast, and fined him £2 and costs 19/-. George Gimblett, who posted a rifle cartridge in a postal package, contrary to the Act, was convicted and ordered to pay 7/costs. For disobedience of a prohibition order, Christian F. Myers was fined £4 and costs 7/-. John McCulloch was convicted and fined £1 and costs 7/- for leaving an express cart standing in Dee street without a light. For failing to register a dog, William Murphy was convicted and fined £l, costs 7/-. For riding a bicycle on Moulson street footpath, Ronald Dunbar; a telegraph messenger, was convicted and fined £l, costs 7/-. Cases of having unregistered firearms were dealt with as follows Holmes, three charges, was convicted on all the charges, fined 5/- with 7/- costs on one charge and discharged on the others; Henry Holmes convicted and ordered to pay 7/- costs; Norman Leslie Melvin, convicted and discharged; Donald Fraser, convicted and discharged; Joseph Ross, convicted and ordered ot pay 7/costs; John William Stead, charge dismissed, defendant stating that he had lent the rifle eight years ago and had forgotten about it until it was returned a short time ago. Roy Whitting, through whose conduct a stand-up fight in Esk street occurred on April 17, was convicted and fined £2, costs 7/-, on a charge of committing a breach of the peace. Senior-Sergeant .Scandrett said that unfavourable reports of the defendant’s behaviour had come to his notice, and the defendant wanted pulling up in the course of conduct he was pursuing. For allowing two horses to be at large, Hugh Donald was convicted and fined £l, costs 7/-; a similar offence in respect of three cows resulted in Christina Finlayson being convicted and fined £l, costs 7/-. “I can’t do otherwise but think that the horses were maliciously let out of their paddock,” said Edward Sheehan when charged with allowing two horses to be at large. After the evidence had been taken defendant was convicted and discharged. A defence defaulter, Arthur J. Joss, was convicted and fined £1 and costs £1 6/-. Edward S. Pay was charged with disobedience of a maintenance order, the amount of the arrears being £l7 6/3. After hearing the evidence of the accused, his Worship varied the order to £2 3/4 per month. On the arrears the defendant was convicted and sentenced to fourteen days’ imprisonment, the warrant not to issue if he paid £8 13/4 on July 1 and £4 3/4 on Aug. 1. Robert Bennett, in arrears under a maintenance order to the extent of £6B 5/-, was convicted and sentenced to three weeks’ imprisonment unless he paid £3 per week until £24 is paid, the balance was cancelled. Charles William Voice was ordered to pay 30/- per calendar month towards the support of a blind child in a Government institution, the first payment to be made on July 1.