>From Western Post, 27 July 1861: POLICE COURT Tuesday July 23rd Before the Police Magistrate, his Worship the Mayor, T CADELL and E MARLAY, Esqrs. John HUGHSON, remanded upon a charge of having a quantity of postage stamps in his possession, supposed to have been stolen, was again brought up. Mr BRODRIBB appeared for the Crown, and Mr JAMES for prisoner. Constable CAMPBELL said, in pursuance of a warrant, he searched prisoner's residence, situated near Reedy Creek, when he found five twopenny stamps in a purse on the floor, and a skeleton key in a tent near the hut, belonging to the prisoner; he likewise found thirty sixpenny stamps. A man of the name of JOHNSON informed him that the box in which he found them belonged to prisoner. Mr BRODRIBB said the Post-office authorities, with whom he had been in communication, had written to say that it was doubtful whether they could identify the stamps as those stolen from the mail; they could send the parties who could prove that they were printed about that time, and a clerk could further prove that £50 worth of stamps were sent to the Mudgee Postmaster; he (Mr BRODRIBB) ! would therefore request the Bench to decide the case summarily under the 1st clause 19th Victoria, No. 24, for although he had not been able to prove that the stamps were the same as those stolen at the mail robbery at Stoney Pinch; it was evident that the prisoner had obtained them in an illegal manner; if he had not actually stolen them himself, he was guilty of receiving them under very suspicious circumstance. The Bench said that the clause referred to was inserted some short time since in consequence of there being so many parties about, having in their possession stolen property, so that every person brought before a bench who could not give a satisfactory account of property found in his possession, was guilty of a misdemeanor. After giving the usual caution the Police Magistrate asked the prisoner what he had to say. Mr JAMES, for prisoner, pressed upon the notice of the Bench the reasonableness of the prisoner's statement, and that he had publicly offered the sta! mps for sale. It was true he had paid £3, which was not to be wondered at, considering how many of them were defaced. The Bench said they had carefully considered the case, and could come to no other conclusion but that the prisoner must have known they were stolen. Had the party come by them honestly, they would not have parted with £14 for £3. They therefore ordered that he should be imprisoned three months; that the stamps should be detained, and if not claimed within twelve months, to be sold for the benefit of the police fund. W SUMMERHAYS, summoned for £5 wages due. Mr JAMES appeared for defendant. George ELLIS said he hired as a labourer at 15s per week; after working a week his master praised him for the excellent way in which he had performed his work; he then told him that he should want 20s in future, which he consented to give him. Mr JAMES called W SUMMERHAYS who denied complainant's statement; he offered him the extra 5s on condition that he understood the lime kiln. Not understanding the work, he spoilt £10 worth of lime. Verdict £3 10s. David TAYLOR and John SMITH, remanded on a charge of robbing a cash box. Mr BRODRIBB for prosecution, and Mr JAMES for defence. Henry RAYNOR was at GILLIS's house on Tuesday evening, where he saw the prisoners. He left the hose for a short time; on his return TAYLOR was missing; the landlord and SMITH went to look for him, but could not find him; he shortly after returned and said he had been to the straw stack and afterwards said he had been down by the river. Heard the cash box was missing about the time the prisoner returned. There were other men in the house at the time. George SMITH, carrier, saw both prisoners at GILLIS' on the evening in question. They were very intimate and appeared as if they were mates. TAYLOR was absent half an hour about the time the box was missed. On his returned he blamed him with taking it; he replied you must prove it. Earlier in the day the men had gone outside and had some conversation together. The box could be seen from the ! bar. S GILLIS - The cash box was kept on a gin case in the bedroom; any one could see it outside the bar; before he missed it he went to it for the purpose of changing a pound-note for SMITH. Both came to the house together. SMITH called TAYLOR out, when they had some talk. SMITH was discharged and TAYLOR committed. ***END*** N.B. All care has been taken to transcribe the above accurately, however errors may have been inadvertently made. Spelling of names/places should be as appears in original. Transcribed from microfilm available from the State Library. Annette Piper Coolah NSW