POLICE COURT.

Colonist, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8063, 6 October 1894, Page 3

POLICE COURT.

YESTEBDAI. [Before H. V. Bobinsojt, E*q., S.M., and J. Sharp aud A. W. Tatios, Esqg., J.J.P.] The first case hen'd was an affiliation caee brought Bgainsi a married man, the father cf nke or tea children. Defendant did not appear. Mr Pitt said defendant bad wised to him that ho would ba present when be had earned sn flick nS to pay bis faie. Mr Pitt said he oouid not appear for defendant, and oiler heamg evidtnoe, it was (vdered that defendant should pay 5s per wetk until the child attained the age of 10 years. Thomas Shiififfe wiis fined 23 Cd, withoat ooßts, far al'o»iDg a horse t) s'.rpy; and J. M. Sonley was fined s*, witbeut costs, in respect to two cows for a like effence. Alfred Nieman, farmer, of Brightwater, bankrupt, was charged tpon the information of Mr A. A. Scaife, Deputy Offioitl Assignee in Bankruptcy, that he, on the 10th July, incurred a debt lo Edward Beicham to the amount of £4 5s 2d, and that be obtained cieit for that amount by fa'se and fraudulent pr< t nics, by pretending that he had at thbt lime moneys coming to aim from Joseph Amy Harley for the purchase of barley sufficient for the payment of the d9b', feeing an indictable ofL-noe. Mr Fell, Crown Prosecutor, appeared for the informant, and Mr Harley for tie cccused. This case was remanded from Sep' ember 21et for evidence that was not available at that time. Mr Fell called the further evidtnee as fol* Iowa : — Felix Green : I am a farmer living at Brightwa'er, near to Nieman'a. I grew a little bar'ey last year, which wi h Nieman's made about 40 sacks, and this was Bold by me to Mr Joseph Harley. Eieman is my brother-in-law. A3 far as I know, Harley did cot know Nieman in the mat er ; he dealt with me. Nieman had 16 sacks, for which he was to receive pajment at the average weight of the lot. He was working i. r me when Constable Knapp cams with tte summons for County Coutcil rates, and Nil man asked me if I could giva him the money to pay Adams & Kiogdon. I gave him an Older on Mr J. Harley for £5 on Bcount of the barley. (Order produoed.) I have not paid him anything further on the barley, and I have still to account to him for the balance. The saoks wou'd average 4§ bushela each at 3g 61 per bushe 1 , thte would make £13 6s. I have not advanced him anything beyond the £5 on the barley. I have not got the we'ghts from Mr J. Harl y yet. I am sure that I still owe Nieman money on the barley. Joseph Auty Harley: I am a brtwe-. I bought 164 i bushela of barley from Mr Felix Green io June last. I did sot know anyone in the transaciioa except Green ; I did not know that; Nieman had any interest in this barley. I gave a deque for the order produced. I first agreed to give 3s 6d per bushel for tte tarley, but afterwards agreed with Gieen that the price should be 3s 3d and aftsr deducting the £5 paid a balance of £21 14s 7d standa to Mr Green's credit in my ledger. Charles John Harley : lam a member of the firm of Adam 3 and Kiafidon. Nieman was Bued by us on behalf of the "Wairnea County Council for rates, the amount was under £5. He gave the order produced on Mr Joseph Harley, which was paid. The summons was withdrawn when the order was

given. Mr Pell said that the evidence then given did not bear out his opaning, nor did it agree with the faeta as represented to Mr Scaife. Hia Worship said that it put quita a different complexion on the matter, and they might take it that Mr Fell was taken by surprise, Mr Fell: Altogether. Mr Harley said that Green was a witness for the prosecution, and bis evidence showed that Nieman had ample money due on the barley beyond the order to pay the amount of Beaohman's account. His Wcrßhip pointed out that Mr Beacham had eaid that Neiman said he was promised a cheque by Mr Harley, while Mr Harley j denied any knowledge o! Nieman ia tha transaction. Mr Harley submitted that the statement to Mr Beacham which might have ben a lie wa3 not false anil fraudulent, end that thete was not a prima facie case made out. Jt was not shown that Nieman anticipate! bankruptcy at that time.

His Worßbip said that the evidence showing a substantial balance to con>e en tie barley, put a different cstnplexion on the case, bat it was ceitiinly a false statement by Niemaa when ha said that be was expecting, or had been promised, a ohf qae from Mr Harley himao'f. Tne Bsnoh had to be satisfied before making a committal, that there was cot only false petence, bat fraudulent intent, and in this case, although tbe s'aemeLt wa3 net a true one, if did appear that there waa a Eum of money doe to Neman on tbe barley amontiting to aboat double the value of tbe gooda obtained from Mr Beaobam. Uader the circumstances he would not commit. Mr Fell said that he was bound to say that tbe evidence given did not agree with that given by Nieman to Mr Soaife, ani upon which the proceedings had been insti uttd. Tbe other charge in reapett to goods to the value of £1 133 obtained from Mrs Franz;n in a similar manner was withdrawn. [Before H. W. Robinson, Esq., S.M. Daniel fiarnett was charged with that by fa's ly repreteating him3elf to be a traveller, lie procured four glasses of beer at the Provincial Hotel en Sunday, September 9tb, during a perbd-that licensed premises ate directed to be closed. There was a similar charge against Henry Tom 9 , and at the request of Mr Barley, who appeared for both defendant, the two charges were heard at the: same time. Sergt.-Major Pratt conducted the prosecufoa, .■■ '. ■ . ■■.■■ ■-■. •■•■ ' -•: ': ■ ■: ■■;■■ The case arose out of the, recent charge against the licensee of the Provincial Ho el for Suaday trading. ; The followng evidenca waa oalled for the prosecution : — v Jtd th Miles: I am living win Mra Clear at the Provincial Hotel as one of the family. I tcvae barmaid occasionally. On Sunday, tbe 9,b September, f cur young men oame into tbe house, I was in the kitchen at the) ttaf* I hM never seen any of them before.

I recognise defendant Toms as one of them* I don't rccognie the other defendant. They had dricks. I a kei tbem if they were travellers, and one of them, described to me sinee aa Henry Cole', answered "yes." They were th> n all close together in the passage. I should think they would all have h«ara what was said. I think it waa Harry Gates who called for the drinks, four beers ; I tton'l remember whether be paid for them. I don't remember how many rounds were drank, but I think someone else called for drinks ; I co lid not say with certainty. I would not have served them bad they not said they were travelers. Gro33vx<imined: K w £ S Hany Coles who answered me. £By the Benoh : I understood Hetty Coles to answer for all cf them. I auked " are you travellers ? " and he said " yes.' 1

SergtjMajor Fratl gave evidence that in the hearing of the case against Mra Olear, Daniel Barnet gave evidence that he shouted four glsssaa of bear, and that b. 2 saw the barmaid speaking to Harry Ooles, while defendant Torus gave evidence that he heard the baimaid a9k Harry Coles if they were travellers, and hia rep y in the affirmative. Barnett admii'ed that he had slept at his home in Waimea street on Saturday nigh', and Toms the day alter the hearing admit.cd the same thing. Efr Harley said that the evidence given showed that Bamett did not hear what passed bstwten Miss Miles and Harry Coles and ie was therefore in the ordinary position of a person asking for a driik and getting it. As rfgardel Tores be stood in a different position but the offence anyway was not a serious en?. He had to come 13 miles into town to give evidence for the pokes losing his wages, and as a reward he was himseit prosecuted. His Worship said that undoubtedly the g'rl had been imposed upon. The only point in favor of Barnett was that the girl wag not sura that he had beard the answer which undoubtedly was made to her. He would leceive the benefit of that doubt, and waß discharged. As regarded Toms, there could be no doubt that he was cognisant of what had been said, and had practically acquiesced. After tome f;r h r remarks to the effect that licensees mu3t be protected from such proceedings, a floe of £2 was inflicted with costs amounting to 93, Bnd one week allowed for payment.