RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 343, 5 September 1868, Page 6

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Saturday, August 29. (Before J, Giles, Esq, E.M.) FIGHTING IN THE STREETS. John Braithwaite and James Mahono charged with this offence were fined 20s. each LTEALING GOLD. James Mai one was charged with felonously stealing gold of the value of £9 12s. 7d. Mr Pitt, who appeared for the prosecution asked for a remand till Monday, for the purpose of procuring the evidence of Laurence Moffat, who had been subpoenaed, but had not put in an appearance. The prisoner had been in custody since the day previous on another charge, so it was virtually no remand. At the request of the Bench one witness was examined. Detective Lambert said, —I know tha prisoner, James Mahone. I saw him in the lock-up yesterday evening in the presence of a man named Urpuhart. Prisoner was iu the lockup, on a charge of being drunk and disorderly, and fighting in the street. I asked Urpuhart if he (prisoner) was the man he charged with stealing gold and he said he was, I then said the prisoner would be detained till he was tried. I then went to subpoena Laurence Moffat, and brought him down to the prisoner in the lock-up. I asked him in prisoner's pre sence whose gold it was that he (Moffat) had sold on the previous day at the Bank of New South Wales. He said he would not answer that, he knew nothing at all about it, but prisoner said it was his gold. I then asked prisoner if Moffat had any money belonging to him. He said at first that he had. not, and then he said he might have a few shillings on my repeating the question. Cn being a-ked if he had any question to put to the witness, prisoner said that he had told all the truth. Prisoner was remanded till Monday morning, bail to be taken, himself in £SO, and two sureties of £25 each. William Mackenzie charged with drunkeness, forfeited his bail of 20s. by non-appearance.

Monday, August 31. (Before J. Giles Esq., E. M.) DRUNKENNESS. Sandy M'Farlane & Patrick Bourke, for this offence were fined 20s each. STEALING EIXtEWOOD. Alexander Ross and John Connor were charged with stealing firewood, the property of A. Brown, of the Camp Hotel. The prosecutor said that he was a storekeeper, residing in AVestport. About a quarter to twelve on Saturday night last, when he was going to bed he was disturbed by hearing a noise at the back door. He heard voices in the yard, and recognised them to be those of the prisoners, and at the same time his next neighbor, Mr Fox, called out who's there, and Connor said " its me;" witness' premises are fenced in. On going out he saw prisoners going out of the yard, each with apiece of wood on his shoulder, witness called out to them to stop or he would fire, when they dropped the wood and .ran away. Shortly after this he met Sergeant "Williams, and gave him information. He did not wish to press the charge, and only brought it to put a stop to a system of petty robbery from his premises in the shape of wood, cases, &c. In reply to the' Bench witness said, the yard was open to Mr Pox's house as well as his. There were only these two houses opening on the one yard. In reply to lloss, witness said that he had been drinking in his house that night, and he had let them out the front way about a quarter-past eleven. They had been in the habit of coming through the back yard for drinks. They did not take up the wood to lift it out of their way, for they ran too quick. He had some wood ouside the yard, which he had not time to take in, and he did not know where the wood was taken from. His wood and Mr Fox's was different, his being large logs and his neighbor's small wood— (

beach wood.' It would be quite impossible to mistake it. In reply to the Bench, witness swore positively it was his wood.

Sergeant Williams proved that he arrested the prisoners on Saturday night. In defence Connor said that he had that night come down for tucker for his mates, from the Caledonian and that he had got the worse for liquors They went to Brown's back door and knocked, butting no answer went away, and out of a lark, as the wood was in their way, took up the sticks of wood. He did not want the wood, for he was not living in town. He had been twenty months in the town and had earned his living honestly, during that time. There was not the slightest intention of stealing the wood, Ross, repeated the same, saying that they had been drinking and went to Browns' as stated. The Magistrate did not feel satisfied that there was any felonious intent, but if the prisoners were convicted, they would only have themselves to blame. They had run a great risk, and this should be a caution to them in future. He therefore shonld dismiss the case.

STfiALDfaBT A MATE. James Mahone was brought up on remand, charged with having stolen gold valued at £9 2s 6d. the property of his mates. Mr. Pitt appeared for the prosecution Hector TJrquhart said—l am a miner, working at Poverty Terrace, and prisoner was one of the men working with me in the same ground. There were other four also working with us. Prisoner was working with me about five months and we worked for about three months before we got a prospect. The first was a very poor one, but afterwards we had very good ones. We first washed about three mouths since. The prospects for three weeks were from half a pennyweight up to four dwts and a half. After we had washed up we had only about thirteen ozs of gold, a yield not at all equal to the prospects. We continued working having, sent this gold down by the prisoner. He brought back none, and he said he had lost it. I came down with him, and as he did not go back the rest of the mates came down to see what was keeping us. He then said that I had taken the gold off him, and on my speaking to him about it said he thought that I had not got it, but that he had given it to Reid the baker. We searched for the gold but could not find it. Eeid had not got it, nor had other people that he blamed fer it, for he named several others. All said they had not got it. A packer came and told us that he had Been prisoner in Powell's store, and that perhaps he had it. During this time prisoner was knocking about looking for the money. I and one of my mates went to Powell's and found that he had £3O, three ten pound notes that prisoner had left there. We took prisoner to Powell's and asked for the money, saying that we were his mates. We got the money and returned home. Prisoner said that he had lost part and spent part of the balance. The money that should have been received for the gold was £SO odd shillings. Afterwards he worked out the balance, prisoner returning to the claim. Last Wednesday prisoner and . I "went to the Caledonian together, after the money was partly shared out, and we were to return on the afternoon and square up the claim's expenses, a balance being left for that purpose. Prisoner met a man naned Moffat on the track, and I then left him. From the time we got the money from Powell till he left off working, I suspected that rough gold out of the trough was missing, and I said so to one of my mates. Prom something we heard that prisoner was doing in Westport I took some steps. He had gone away with one of the mates money, and I came dowu and found him in prison, for drunkenness. I saw him after coming out of prison, on Thursday afternoon last, at the bank of New South Wales. We always sold our gold to the hank of New South Wales. He was then getting about three oz. of gold melted. He went out as I went in and I asked to see the gold. It was exactly the same as we get out of our ground; but there had been silver amongst it that had been burnt off. We get very rough, scaly gold at Poverty terrace, and this was exactly the same quality. It does not need much quicksilver. When I saw him I told him it was rather hard to see my gold there and that I could not touch it. He told me that he had forgotten more than ever I knew, and wanted to fight me for it. I left him there. On the morning of the same day we had seen him in a public house and asked him where he got the gold from. There were several people, one

of my mates, a busiuesman from the ©aledonian and a man named Moffat. We had previously been told that he had gold. I told him if he had any gold it could not be his own, and he then said the gold was his. I asked him how he got it, and he said he had got it when we had knocked off working about the paddock. I asked him how he could do that, and he said he had lifted the slabs and got it about the box. My mate told him that if he would show him where he could get it in a week, let alone an hour, he would be satisfied. He did not say what quantity he got. Dont supqose there would have been over two oz. of quickdiver. Gave no other account to me how he got this gold, but did to a man in the lockup. Left off working the claim last Wednesday. The box's are in the same place, and the slabs have not been moved, we examined the places prisoner said he had taken the gold out of and found nothing disturbed, tools and all in the same place as on Monday. Prisoner, prospects in the claim have been from -§• dwt. to 4|- dwts. washed up 14 oz. came down to Westport with you and saw it retorted and smelted claim expenses have not been settled yet. Tou paid the blacksmith £2, and you paid for a pick for the claim in the next store; you paid for two shirts at Onslow House, and a pair of blankets. I borrowed £3 from you out of that money. I searched you to see what money you had, and took £1 8s 6d from you. Tou were not washing after we came from the Buller, I would not allow you to wash you were underground always after, except the last day when you washed part of it. One of the mates brought down the gold last Tuesday morning ; we all agreed to abandon this ground. The same two men were washing on Saturday. It wasagreed that everyone could go into the claim and work it for his own advantage. Tou were not at work on Tuesday, the day after the ground Was abandoned; did not see you doing anything to the gold after that first washing. Eive of us lived in the hut.

By Mr Pitt —Washed with a fork and shovel by two men, the stuff was strained and put into a tub to get the sand off. It . was left in that for a fortnight and then amalgamated. If the quicksilver was burned off on a shovel, it would have the same appearance as the gold at the bank. The prisoner was at the hut two Sundays alone. lam not certain which two it was, but think it was the two Sundays after the 13 oz. were sold.

Thomas M'Leod examined —I am one of the mates in this claim. Remember first washing about ten weeks ago, noticed the prospects before washing, one washing was four dwts and a half, others two dwts and a half. Did not expect much more than we had from first washing; remember sale of first gold, prisoner and first witness went down with it, after their return, continued to work the claim. Urquhart said to him in the tunnel one night that he thought this gold should turn out more than it was. I said I did not think there was anything wrong, nor did I think there was after that. Came down last Priday to see what was keeping the two chaps that went the day before'; did not see the prisoner till.Saturday, when I saw him in the dock.

By prisoner'—Touhad nothing to do with washing after this first, until Monday forenon you washed for a couple of hours. Everything was carried to the hut, and the ground abandoned. Knew prisoner to be left alone many a Sunday, we all went to the Caledonian; had no suspicions of your taking any gold, if I had I would not have gone. Never heard any one Ray they suspected you, except Urquhart. The heads of the boxes have been lifted, I did not notice the paddock being scraped. To Mr Pitt —The tubs have been moved. Could not say that any work has been done since we washed up ; don't think two or three ozs of gold could have been taken out of the claim; came to town on Tuesday and left the prisoner at the claim. Owen Martin corroborated the evidence of the previous witness. The prisoner cross-examined this witness at some length, but elicited nothing favourable to his case. Robert Geddings, smelter at the Bank of New South Wales, Westport, proved that on Thursday last the prisoner in company with a man named Moffat, was in the smelting house, and asked to have some gold retorted, that was then brought. Moffat asked witness to get the gold ready by the time they came back. Moffat said to prisoner, whose gold is it, is it yours, or is it mine, aud the prisoner replied, I suppose it belongs to the pair of us, Moffat told witness to give him a

ticket, and he did so. There seemed to be some anxiety between them as to who should have the ticket., A short time afterwards Urquhart came in, and witness showed him the gold, and told him to take care of it for it was stolen gold. There were very few parcels of this kind of gold coming in-, to the bank, and'it is the coarsest gold except up the Buller. Witness had smelted similar gold for the party before. The ticket produced is one of the Bank of New South Walas, and was given to Moffat.

In reply to prisoner witness said that prisoner did not say the gold was his own or that he got it in working by himself. W. Laurence Moffat, for whom a warrant had been issued to compel his attendance, as he had failed to appear on being subpoenaed explained that he had intended to come, but was late. He knew the prisoner and was in company with him on the previous Wednesday. He told witness he was working in a claim, and gave him some amalgam to take care of. He did not say where he got it from, and gave it to witness because he himself was drunk and incapable of taking care of it. They met the mates of prisoner on Thursday, and some words passed about some gold, one of the prisoner's mates saying that it was very wrong to treat them as he had done. At this time witness had the amalgam that prisoner gave him. The gold was sold for between £9 and £lO, and witness at prisoner's request handed a £5 and three £1 notes to Urquhart. Urquhart wab asked to step forward, and the witness repeated his statement that to the best of his knowledge he had handed him the above money.

Examination continued Besides this £9 odd, witness had three £5 notes and a £l that he was keeping for prisoner. The latter gave them to him at the same time he gave the amalgam. Prisoner did not tell him what he was to pay the £3 for. By the Bench—All this was in the presence of the prisoner, and was shortly after prisoner's mate said he acted wrongly. Ihe witness Urquhart was recalled, and denied that the previous witness had paid him any money whatever as he alleged. The last division of gold was £8 9s per man. Prisoner was entrusted with the share of one of the mates named Neil Nicholson, and he came down to Westport with it. Nicholson was in the room with them when they first charged prisoner with acting wrongly. Thomas M'Conochie, a butcher, gave further evidence, but it contained no new feature. Mr Pitt addressed the Bench to show that, though the prisoner was a partner, if he intended to defraud his partners, he would be liable to an indictment for larceny, and he quoted authorities in support of this view. The prisoner said—l consider I was quite justified in going to work on Tuesday, and getting what I could for myself, as the claim had been abandoned on the Friday previous. That little bit of amalgam was the proceeds of my day's work, and I consider it my own property and not the property of the other five, therefore I appropriated it to my own uses. I have been in the colonies fifteen years, and—The Magistrate stopped prisoner from saying more, and asked if he was goiug to call any witnesses to rebut the charge. Prisoner said he had none, but wished to call witnesses to character. The Magistrate declined to allow this, and considered that there was sufficient evidence to send the prisoner to a jury, though it was of a circumstantial kind. The prisoner was then committed to take his trial at the next District Court. Bail to be taken, himself in £BO and two sureties of £BO each.

PERJl T KY. George Blair was charged on the information of Reuben Waite, with having on the 16th of March, 18GS, at theßesidentMagistrate'sCourt,Nelson, committed wilful and corrupt perjury in a case, Waite v. Norton and Co. Mr Tyler appeared for the prosecution.

A question arose as to whether this case should not be gone into at Nelson instead of here, as the principal witnesses were in Nelson. It was ultimately resolved to hear the witnesses resident in Westport, to see if a prima facie case could be made out to justify the remand of defendant to Nelson. Mr Campbell appeared for the defendant. Reuben Waite said—l am a storekeeper residing at Nelson. In February and March last I took proceedings against Norton and Co., the case was heard twice; it was adjourned for a month. 1 sued for £IOO, for the ground on which the British American stands j it was known at the time it

was sold as Cave and Thomson's store. I was not present when it was sold; know defendant, he was present at the trial on both occasions ; was present when he gave his evidence for defendant, as one of the company, before. Mr Poynter, -KM., Nelson s'heard an oath administered to defendant by the bailiff of the Court, Alfred Helps, Defendant swore that he had paid Mrs Waite ■ £100; he swore that he paid Mrs Waite £IOO and produced a receipt, he said this on 17th of February and 16th March, and produced a receipt.in Mrs Waite's writing, but she denied it. He said he was nrit present at the time the purchase was made of- Cave and Thomson's store. He was not present at the time of the purchase by Norton and Co from Mrs "Waite. He swore that at the tin e Norton went out of the firm in December '66, and then the receipt was: then produced. He said Norman and Norton were present and that Batty was not. He said also there was not £IOO down in the list of; creditors at the time of dissolution in 1866, and also that he never had any of my money from Mrs Waite. He said he took the purchase money from Norton and Co's till, and that that firm had no banking account at the time. I have never received the £IOO for the ground from any one. The result of that case was that judgment was given in my favour for £IOO and costs.

Cross-examined by Mr Campbell.— There waa a receipt produced which Mrs Waite admitted was wholly in her handwriting. Blair was a partner at the time the purchase was made. Mrs Hankins was called and proved that she was a witness in a case at Nelson in March last, when "Waite was plaintiff, and Norton and Co defendants. In January 1867 she went to Hokitifca, and took a letter to Mrs Waite from Blair. He was anxious to get a receipt, from Mrs "Waite far £IOO balance due for some leasehold property. She read a portion which asked for a receipt. She brought a letter back acknowledging the receipt of some money, but did not bring the receipt asked for. Cross-examined by Mr Campbell.— She was sure that defendant wanted to get a receipt for £IOO and not for the £2O sent. The sum of £IOO was specially mentioned. George Norman proved that the defendant, Matthew Batty, Charles Batchelor, and John Norton, were members of the firm of Norton and Co. The firm dissolved in December 1866, when all were present with the exception of Batchelor. The defendant, George Blair, was present. - A statement of accounts was drawn up at that time. The principal creditors of the new firm was Norton, Dreyer, Reuben Waite were others. The creditor's names were written down when the settlement took place, and Blair was present. Waite's debt was £IOO balance of purchase money for the ground the British American stood on. Blair did not say this was paid in witness' hearing, and the amounts were then gone into; at the time no receipt was produced for Waite's account. There was no entry of the amount having been paid. Witness had charge of the till and kept the key. He never knew of any large sum being taken out by any one but by himself. Both witness and defendant had keys of the till, in the months of September, October, and till the time of dissolution £IOO could not have been taken without his missing it, and he did not miss it. Defendant never said, up to the time of disolution that £IOO had been paid to Waite. All accounts were kept by witness. By Mr Campbell —He did not think it could have been possible for £IOO to have been taken out of the firm without his knowledge, witness was up the Buller sometimes. Mr Tyler said that this was all the evidence he could now adduce, and he asked the Bench to remand the case to Nelson as there were three important wituesses there. The Magistrate said his present impression was to dismiss the case, in order to allow a fresh information to be laid in Nelson. Mr Tyler objected to this course, rather than that he would subpoena witnesses from Nelson. He therefore asked for a remand of eight days, in order to procure their attendance. The Magistrate thought it was very clear that the information should have been laid in Nelson. He would adjourn the case till next (this) day in order to consider the point. A case Morgan v. Rimmer was adjourned to Charleston.

CHARLESTON POLICE COURT. (Before Chas. Broad Esq., R. M.) Daniel MTherson was convicted of stealing a bottle of gin from the Casino, and sentenced to seven days imprisonment.

Robert Kynie and William Ceilings were lined -AGs and 20a respectively, for being drunk and disorderly, and Alice Beynon forfeited her bail of 40s on a chargo of using abusive language. Maguin and Co. v. John O'Brien — Claim of £8 3s 9d. for goods supplied. Plaintiff nonsuited. Skoglund and Co. v. Cedarwell — Claim, £7 Ds. Judgment confessed. Gibbons v. M'Carthy—Claim, £2B 4s yd for timber. Summons enlarged for a week. J. Runge v. J. Bridson—This was a 'claim of c£6o for damages alleged to have been done by defendant to a crushing machine in which the plaintiff had a half shave. Mr O'-Neil appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Home for the defendant. The case occupied the Court a long time, but the facts were very simple. It appeared that the party working the claim ran up a debt of £32 with the defendant, and the latter finding that they had left, went out to the ground and took away the copper plates and some of the gear belonging to the machine. The plaintiff, who had no share in the claim, but was part owner in the machine, objected to the proceeding, and brought forward several witnesses to prove that it would cost £4O to £45 to replace the machinery in good order. On the other hand defendant's counseladduced equally good evidence to show that beyond the plates, the machine was almost worthless, and that it could be put into the same condition as found by defendant, for £4 to £7. His Ilonor commented on the discrepancy of the evidence, as to value, and assessed the damages at £ls, giving judgment for plaintiff for one half that amount, with £6 2s. costs.

Wednesday, September 2nd. (Before J. Giles Esq., R. M.) ASSAULT. Richard Hazell was charged with having on the first of September unlawfully assaulted and beaten C. M. Eox.

The prosecutor said, I am a bootmaker residing in Gladstone street Westport. On Monday night last I was at a ball at Brent's store and left this about 3 o'clock on Tuesday morning. Previous to my going away I saw the defendant who was there with oysters and I ordered a dozen. Whilst eating them I had £3 in my left hand pocket, but or putting my hand into my pocket to get money to pay for them, I found it had gone. Hazell left before me and on my way home [ called at his place. I asked him if he saw anything particular Avbilst I was taking the oysters, as I had lost my money. He then seized a knife 6ft' the counter and made a rush at me and struck me with it over the eye inflicting a severe wound. In trying to get away I fell down through putting my foot into a hole just outside the the shop when defendant attacked me again. I called out police and then to let me alone. I ran into Gladstone street and met the night watchman who walked up home with me, as I was bleeding profusely from the wound, I was told I could not give him in to custody as the police'did not see the assault and so I laid an information against him in the morning.

Cross-examined by defendant —I bave known you two years and have bad no quarrel, I told you before I left the store that I bad lost my money, but not before you served me with oysters. I do not think I told you I had been gambling. I did not tell youl had lost £l3. I bad no scuffle with any one T had been gambling with I did not shove the man I had been gambling with outside that I know of.

I swera you stabbed me with a knife and you said nothing but what I bave stated. I did not call you a b

lying thief. Tou did not tell me to go out of the shop, or I should be knocked out. Tou followed me out into the street and kicked me on the jaw and on the hip. By the Bench —I was not particularly sober, but I was not drunk, and knew particularly well what transpired. I had bad one glass of gm, and one glass of claret punch at the store, and I was perfectly sober when I was there ; defendant appeared to be perfectly sober. "William Pagg ? night watchman, proved that on the morning in question, between three and four o'clock he heard some one say " that's the way you do it, is it ?" He turned and saw the complainant leaning against Smith andM'DowoH's store, and subsequently go up Gladstone street, and call police. He told witness that he had been assaulted, and that his eye had been cut out. At the time he was bleeding, and witness took him home, In reply to defendant, witness said that when he first met complainant the latter told him that Ilazoll had struck him. Ho did not say that he had stabbed him till afterwards.

A. Russell culled by complainant to prove that he was sober, proved that lie saw him on that morning. He had had a good nobbier, and was pretty hot : lie was not sober.

Dr Thorpe proved that he had examined complainant, and found him . uffering from a severe contusion of the right eye, and a lacerated wound five breadths of an-inch long, and a quarter of an inch deep, over the right eyebrow. He also had some slight scratches on other parts of the face. He complained of kicks on the body, but there were no bruises, the wound was caused either by a blow or by a blunt instrument, but not by a sharp instrument.

In reply to defendant the witness said the cut might have been occasioned by knuckles. William Lemming and Richard Sowrie called in defence, proved that complainant came into defendant's place, called him a liar, a thief', and other names, and that the latter then put him out, and struck him. The Magistrate did not think that the use of the knife had been proved, but he considered that a brutal assault had been committed, and he should fine defendant £5, or three weeks imprisonment.

"WARDEN'S COURT. Wednesday, September 2. 1888. (Before J. Giles Esq , Warden.) Johnston and party applied for a head race at Deadrnan's ; granted. Thompson and party for a dam north of Deadman's ; granted. • Cargill and party for a head race at Deadman's; granted. Campbell and party application for extension of present tunnel from 700 feet to 1000 feet at Rochfort Terrace. This was opposed by the Caledonian Tramway proprietors on the ground that it would cross their line on two places, and the application was refused, but would be granted if the Caledonian Tramway proprietors do not carry out their works. J, Birch and party, application for a tunnel, to be used as an air shaft, at G-iles' Terrace; protection granted in condition it did not interfere with the objectors, Yeale and party. Homer and party amalgamation with Boyne and party. This was opposed by G-ray and party, and the application was refused. Horner and party, application for tunnel at German Terrace ; granted.

Spraggon and party, temporary protection for 20x300 feet back lead, Giles' Terrace; granted. Patterson, Darling, and party, amalgamation ; granted. Simons and party, extension of tuunel 100 feet from present termination at Deadman's Creek ; granted. Hall and party and Thompson and party, amalgamation of claims on Rocht'ort Terrace ; granted.' Watkin and party, for a dam at German Terrace ;'granted. Homer and party, special site for stacking tailings at German Terrace. Posponed till a plan of the gronud was produced. Simons and party, special site for paddock and washing purposes at Deadman's Creek; granted. Younghusband and party, extended claim of one acre at Harrisons' Flat, Addison's,; granted. M'Carthy and party, bead race at the Lyell; granted.