RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1578, 7 May 1887, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Gekaidine—Thursday, Mat 5, 1887. [Before R. 11. Pearpoint and H. W. Moore, Esqs., J.P.'s.] LARCENY. James Wilcock was charged on remand with the larceny on April 30 of seven shirts value £1 2s 91, one pair of trousers 17s 6«1, one P air of boots value 8s 6a, lota! value £2 8s 9d, the property of Robert Darlow, bootmaker and draper, Geraldine. Mr White appeared for accused, and Constable Willongbby conducted the case for the prosecution.

Robert sworn, said he was a bootmaker and Jraper in Geraldine. Bis bootghop and drapery wra both connected with the dwelling house, with passages running into each. He recognised ihe clothes produced as those he recovered from accused on Monday last. He had them for sale in his Bhop pitced on a boot trunk just inside the door, Had first missed them on Monday morning. He next saw them in an outhouse at Wilcock's place, on the Pleasant Valley road. The place was used as a sleeping apartment by the accused, but there were no other goods anything like them, There were a pair of boots which accused admitted having stolen, but which he (witness) bad not missed. Had seen George Wilcock, ind he was wearing a shirt similar to one of those missed. George Wilcock called his brother, accused, who acknowledged stealing the things. Accused said be would givo up the tilings, and went to the sleeping apartment and brought the goods and a pair of boots and a shirt that had been wet and was hanging up to dry. Witness did not bring the things away lhat hid been worn, as they were of no use to him, aud as he was holding some money of accused's for * f>air of bools that had not been finished. Accused said he would keep the worn things and witness could keep the money ho was holding. To Mr White : 1 had received money previously from accused. The amount was 14s 6d. I had received part payment for a pair of boots I was to make for accused. At the time of thn interview I had not supplied the boots, go that I was owing bim that 14s 6d on the boots. This interview was on IV'onday last. I was sefciled with by a return t of the articles, and by an agreement to I keep the money 1 had. I have known accused for a short time. Have had a few business transactions with him. I never thought him a smart or clever boy. I do not t'link he is very quickwitted, judging from ivhafc I have seen of him. I have instructed no information to be laid. The reason I did not lay the information myself whs that when I had the interview with the boys I also saw Mrs Wilcock and spoke to her about the matter, and arranged with her that I should see the-lad again and give him a good talking to, and it was considered that as far as I was concerned that would be the b-*st course to pursue. ToOonstab'eWilloughby : I reported the case to you before I went down to Wilcock's aud then followed your advice. Constable Willoughby BBked witness bow he could settle the matter with the accused after having reported it to him, Witness explained to the B-mch that he reported the matter to the Constable, and it was talked over, and the Constable gave bim a suggestion as to where the goods were. He had not followed the Constable's directions to the letter, but bad acted on his ow n responsibility as to finding where the goods were. Had told Mrs Wilcock that as far as he was concerned he did not thick he would tske any action upon his own responsibility, but that he had seen Constable Willoughby and reported the matter to him, and if he liked to take proceedings he (witness) could Ho t othing in t l ie matter. George Wilcock, brother of accused, said he remembered Saturday ni«bt, April 30ib. Saw his brother m the street and went borne about 11 p.m. When ho got home his brotaer was in bed and asleep. They slept in the same room. The next morning his brother brought out a bundle of clean shirt*. Witness asked him for one of them. Accused said he had bought them, also a pair of trousers. This was on the Sunday. When Mr Darlow came down on the Monday, he asked wnnesa if he knew what he came there for. Witness said no. Darlow said he ought to. nehad come down for some shirts that witness had taken away. Witness denied taking them and called his brother, who admitted having taken them. Accused brought the things and gave them to Harlow. Darlow bad agreed to take the things not damaged and to receive the money for the others.- Witness paid him the next day for the things retained. Constable Willoughby, sworn, said on Tuesday May 3, he had arrested accused 00 a charge of larceny of the goods mentioned in the information. He voluntarily made a statement that he had taken the goods and put them into Darlow's outhouse and then went into Ibe shop and spoke to Darlow, taking the goods afterwards, as he was going home, and giving bis brother a shirt. This was the ca6e for the prosecution. For the defence Mr White called Lot Wilcock, father of the accused, who upon being sworn, said that he bad for some time past noticed that the boy had acted strangely—ever sinco he was arrested in the early part of the year. He had been arrested for assault and had been sentenced to a month's imprisonment. Since thsn, witness had noticed that had he never been the same boy. He talked a great deal to himself when alone, and witness had frequently sent out to see who he was talking to, and found no one was there. He had also seen him driving the horses when he should not, and when witness asked him where he was going, he would reply he did not know. The boy had not "appeared right in his head since his arrest. Mr White asked the Bench not fo punish the boy. Of course they could see that his object in pleadiug not guilty was for the purpose of getting the whole of the evidence in the case. If he had pleaded guilty, he would not have got any evidence. He submitted

that, the evidence of Mr Darlow and Constable WiUou»hby coupled with that of tho father showed that the bey waß not a sharp clever boy or a sensible boy. If ho w»s a thief he would not have told Darlow, and would not have made a voluntary statement to the police constable, If the boy were a thief he would know the consequence to himself too well to give evidence against hiiiself, whereas a boy not in the full possession of his senses would probably give an account of all that he did. Mr Darlow's evidence showed that at the time the boy was arrested there wis no evidence against him, because Darlov had traeted the matter as a contract., had takan part of the goods back and had received payment for the remainder. He submitted it was entirely on nil fours with the tried at Teuiuka the previous day before Mr Boswick, where a men was charged with the luv ceny of some liquors, value 10a, and in the cross-examination it was elicited from the prosecutrix that the man had paid for the drinks. The case as reported in the Guakdiah was dismissed, and he thought very properly as where, one person took the property of another, and did not do so with a dishonest intent, it was only a trespass, (and if a person tieated it as a trespass it was not an idictable offence. Mr White went on to address the Court for some time, pointing out that the swora evidence of the father, partly corroborated by Mr Darlow, shewed that the boy was not compos mentis, and really not answerable for what he did. He asked their Worships to deal as leniently as possible witb him. Their Worships hiving conferred, stated they had decided toad]ourn f he Court for a quarter of an hour, aud instruct the Probation Officer to make a report as to whether the prisoner was a fit subject for probation. The Court having resumed their Worships said that while wishing to deal leniently with the boy they could not, in the f"C-> of the report, admit him to probation. He would be imprisoned for 'wo months with hard labor. The Court then adjourned.