MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 12771, 15 October 1919, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

TO-DAY’S SITTING.

CHRISTCHURCH.

Mr V. G. Hay, S.M., presided at to-day s sittings of the Magistrate’s Court. DRUNKENNESS. A first offender for drunkenness was fined os, in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. Another first offender, who had been found drunk on the Railway Station, was fined 10s, in default, forty-eight hours’ imprisonment.

A SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION. Albert Whittaker, for whom Mr J. A. Cassidy appeared, pleaded not guilty _to o charge that on or about April 5 he did steal a bicycle, valued at £l2 10s, the property of Douglas Norms.

Douglas Norris, a Post Office messenger, recognised the bicycle as his property. It was his duty to visit tho “ Lyttelton Times ’’ Office each afternoon about three o’clock for the purpose of getting papers. On April b he went to the ‘‘Lyttelton Times” Office, and left his bicycle standing at the end of the right-of-way while he went inside. On returning the bicycle was missing. Some lime later he S! same bicycle again in the right-of-way, but one of the wheels had been changed. George Stanley Lewis, salesman, said that tho accused had purchased a bicycle from him on April 4 (receipt produced)-

Mr Cassidy said that the accused held a responsible position, and had had tho misfortune to have three bicycles stolon from him. On the day before the bicycle was stolen the accused purchased a bicycle from Air Lewis, of Messrs M’Kenzie and Willis. On April 28 he rode his bicycle to tbe Railway Station, and when he came back, after going in to purchase a ticket, it was missing, and the other bicycle was standing in the rack. Accused waited about the station for over two hours, thinking someone had taken his bicycle by mistake, and finally he rode off on the other bicycle. Iho accused gave evidence supporting this account of the affair. The Magistrate said he was satisfied with accused's explanation of the occurrence. Tho charge would be dismissed. A NEIGHBOURS’ QUARREL. ’ Percy VVentworth Reeves (Mr Cuthbert) applied for sureties of the peace from Ernest Edmonds (Mr C. S. Thomas). The application arose out of a quarrel between tho two parties while they were neighbours in Tancred Street, Linwood. The complainant, a cutler, living at Tancred Street, Linwood, stated that on September 22 ho met his wife, who complained that the defendant had made certain threats against her. He met the defendant later, and told him that he wished him not to molest his (witness’s) wife and boy in the way he had been doing. The defendant subsequently struck him on the face and threatened to “ do him in,” and also lus wife and son. Defendant had expressed his willingness to “hang for them ’’ if necessary. Air Thomas, for tho defendant, admitted _ that defendant had struck the complainant, but had done so under provocation, as he felt he had a grievance against the Reeves family, owing to their interference in his* private affairs. There was no need now for sureties of the peace as defendant had no intention of pursuing Rio quarrel any further.

Alter hearing the evidence, the .Mag Ist rate hound over tho defendant in his own surety ot £lO, to keep the peace for six months. Defendant was also ordered to pay the costs of the case.